head
Spread the love
  • 2
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •   
  •   
  •   

Huntington, WV — A disturbing video was uploaded to Facebook this week by a West Virginia law firm showing their client get brutally taken down by a Huntington cop. The hard to watch video is the perfect example of excessive force and has caused quite the outrage online.

In the video, a man is being arrested for public intoxication. This man’s only ‘crime’ was being drunk while walking, yet this officer chose to escalate force to near-deadly proportions.

While the man was certainly inebriated, he was posing absolutely no threat to anyone around him as a child could’ve simply knocked him down. However, this officer—apparently short on patience—felt the need to employ a leg sweep and body slam.

Without provocation or reason, the officer all of the sudden kicks the drunk man’s legs out from under him. The man is sent hurling toward the ground head-first. When his head hits the pavement, the sound is painful to hear.

Onlookers are astonished at the officer’s need use of force. “I think he hit his head pretty hard,” says one man. “I think he might be out.”

And out he was.

As the man lay there unconscious, suffering from a potentially fatal blow to the head, the officer mounts him, puts a knee in his back and places him in handcuffs.

“Premeditated use of force. point blank. I get that the job is demanding and dangerous but there’s a line and I feel a lot of these officers look for reasons to cross it when it could be avoided,” wrote a Facebook user.

I’m gonna say uncalled for…. at times yes, that would have been something to do IF he was resisting and feisty. He was too drunk to stand. I usually side with officers, but this was uncalled for…” another user wrote.

“The man was not resisting. This is why people hate cops that was total bull crap what he just did,” another person noted.

However, not everyone was quick to call out the officer. One person defended the officer’s actions, saying, “I love the comments from people who have never been in the law enforcement field. Arm chair quater (sic) backs. There was no hitting or kicking or excessive force used. The dude tried rolling out and the officer defused the situation by taking him to the ground to control him. People are so quick to bash LEO anymore. Would it have mattered of (sic) this individual would have been fighting with them and would have been talking. Law enforcement cannot win with people. If they shoot someone they are murders, if they apprehend someone it is excessive force.”

Another supporter of the violent escalation said, “The policeman acted 100% accordingly. Notice how calm he was. The “client” is intoxicated and can’t stand still. A policeman has no idea the intention of someone, if he’s moving he’s resisting. It was a simple leg sweep.
This idiot (client) shouldn’t have a case and shame on you for representing him. This is exactly why Attorney’s have bad reputations. #bluelivesmatter #istandwiththepolice

The Free Thought Project reached out to the Huntington Police Department but as of the publishing of this article, we’ve not yet heard back.

Weston Robertson Law firm originally posted the video with the following description.

Weston | Robertson takes special interest in Police Brutality cases to protect civil rights in our community. We wanted to share with you a video capturing our client’s encounter with the Huntington Police Department as a result of a public intoxication disturbance call. We would like to hear your objective comments regarding the necessity of the leg sweeping maneuver used. We welcome all opinions, but please keep it clean. Please share as well.

The firm has since taken down the video, thankfully the internet saved it.

 


Spread the love
  • 2
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •   
  •   
  •   

DASH cryptocurrency and The Free Thought Project have formed a partnership that will continue to spread the ideas of peace and freedom while simultaneously teaching people how to operate outside of the establishment systems of control like using cryptocurrency instead of dollars. Winning this battle is as simple as choosing to abstain from the violent corrupt old system and participating in the new and peaceful system that hands the power back to the people. DASH is this system.

DASH digital cash takes the control the banking elite has over money and gives it back to the people. It is the ultimate weapon in the battle against the money changers and information controllers.

If you'd like to start your own DASH wallet and be a part of this change and battle for peace and freedom, you can start right here. DASH is already accepted by vendors all across the world so you can begin using it immediately.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Facebook.

109 COMMENTS

    • Being drunk as a skunk, does not give a cop the excuse, or rights, to be a total hands on over the top jerk about it. Except that they can be because a badage say’s they can, and getting away with it ! Like the recent ass holes feeling threatened did, all because a 92 year old geezer waved his Stick At Em ! Or in Oregon, when a femail cop, goes out of her way to arrest a man with a golf club, that he used as his cane does, then making up lies to justify it, and only later getting caught on video, resulting in her getting fired for it.

  1. My son, while in college, was pretty drunk one night and decided to pee behind a bush. A campus Pd person saw this and decided he needed to be arrested for public intoxication and urination. He was cited, handcuffed, transported to a different city 20 miles away, and put into the drunk tank for the night, the next day released after a court appearance, and fined $120.00 or 30 hrs community service. We got the phone call well after that.

    That was it, no leg sweeps, no takedowns, no knee on the back as is shown here by this DOOFUS cop, just a simple arrest for bush peeing is all.

    The cops in this College Town are well acquainted to the kids actions there, and adjust accordingly. But in past have been know to react violently to them, when things have gotten out of control, like at the City Halloween Street Parties, shutting em down for ever happening in the future, by a ban against. Maybe they (the kids) deserving it for being idiots, drunken louts and punks on dope.

    In my case the cop was respectful to my son, in this case he was not, and had he not been to my son as shown here. Then the situation would have been different, and I would have acted accordingly. I think it’s time that folks acted accordingly to there situations, and not so much rely on lawyers to do there talking for em. Because in the long run, it doesn’t seem do a lick of good, when it cost noting to cops or the pd in general. and apparently no lessons learned. DOSE IT ?

      • There ya happy ! But I’am still grumbling in my soup. And none for you lady ! Except the tomatoes that are done now.

        I was worried a bit, thinking about if you got blown off the planet or not. You’s ok I take it. None I hope the worst for wear ?

          • I visited Chicago once a long time ago, and left about as fast as I got there. Nothing to see, boring as hell and friggin cold in Dec.

            As to embarrassin’ the Lord goes. That’s easy silly goose ! Just be yourself. I know I do it all the time, and always with the same results of, He just looking at me and Rolling His Eyes, sighing a lot!

    • shouldn’t’ve been an arrest at all . there should be public toilets, and that was an infraction the cop could’ve just handed a citation over and given him a receipt for his car keys, so he couldn’t drive … maybe called him a cab home

    • Huntington’s campus cops almost shot me on more than one occasion for pot. These pussies are so afraid that if they take a shit, El Chapo’s going to come crawling out of their asses with a giant bomb and a firearm and I really wish he would.

      • My other son went to the same college befor this one, and was a RA there. With him being the local enforcer of campus and college rules at the dorms. He was the one who would pour the new bottles of gin or whiskey down the drain, or confiscate the pot or other goodies that was left in open sight, when the complaints rolled in. They did not do room searches or toss people’s stuff about, but merely looked around for the crap, that was obviously left in plane sight, and tossed it out. Some of the kids nearly cried when they watched there stash being hauled off. But it was either that, or lose there rights to live in campus dorms. The campus pd did not do any dorm searches or seizures, or participated with the RA’s ever. And were the enforcer of the Laws such as cops do normally. With it sounding like the pd at your college being a lot more involved in the day to day college life, that what my son experienced.

        • My sister was an RA at her own college back in the day, so I knew the drill. A lot of the RAs are cool and nobody’s room gets searched unless they’re looking for something important like firearms and you’ll still be fine if you just tuck your liquor into your backpack. But there was this one cunt whose dad was some kind of pig, so she just went straight to 911 soon as she smelled pot. I swear, they showed up rolling ten plus deep. I hope somebody robbed a bank while they were distracted by the threat to national security our pot smoke apparently was.

          • Some of the kids did get there stomicks pumped out at ENLO, because they were too drunk to stand up, and in danger of dieing from liquor poisoning as the result. Matthew did it mostly because of free rent and board, plus got payed to boot, for sitting in on the day at the pool and other college organized and dorm events. Cheaper for me as Dad, to pay for him being there at school, and more fun for him as well. Overall not a bad deal. Too bad about the gal who called 911 for even a whiff, she would not have lasted more than a day at Chico State, befor the dorm kids had her bags packed and her butt out the door. There they took their partying seriously, but with some caution.

    • if you think peeing in a bush is an arrestable offense and your kid was dragged 20 miles and locked up overnight and fined because a campus cop NEEDED to show he was worth his pay, you need to reassess your understanding of justice….were your kid a public nuisance or a threat to others then the arrest might be justified….but peeing on a bush?…get your head examined because he was lucky he didn’t encounter that particular pig…otherwise you wouldn’t be so apologetic for cops

      !

      • Did I say I thought it was justifiable ? Did I say anything, or imply that there was an apology owed from anyone ? Twenty miles away is where the County Seat is located, which happens to be where the drunk tank is located, and not where the incident on campus occurred.

        You know nothing about anything, except what I have written, and for to infer or imply anything more, is simply you, reading into it more that what is the actuality of reality.

        Thinking that it’s perhaps you that needs to have there head examined, and not me !

      • I have to agree that is a little over the top for doing a natural body function. Did anyone sleep any better know that man that had to piss is off our streets? I didn’t, what about everyone else that pisses? Round those sobs up! And those runners just huffing and puffing everyone’s air! I don’t like that hogging up all the air like its all theirs. Can we have some law and order around here! lol

  2. Why no mention of the size difference? That cop is huge! He’s also a dumbfuck who can’t put on cuffs. Totally his fault and excessive.

    • Yep sad but true. You can’t expect a DA to prosecute one of their co-workers that does all the work on their cases do you, you can’t do that. Plus when you know these cops personally they are all A-1 people. I used to work in an office full of retired cops, nicest guys in the world but I wouldn’t want to be on the business end of any of them in a dark alley. As one old cop was explaining dirty cops to me, he said ok I can explain that “All damn dirty…If my partner murders his dope dealer and I turn my head and look the other way, what do that make me? There ya go all damn dirty!” I said no way, but then I busted the dirty cop red handed “What about Frank Serpico!” The cop did own up to it “You’re right, there was one good cop, I stand corrected there was one. Sad how that ended up for him…the one good cop.” So we just have to deal with bad cops the same way cops deal with bad untrustworthy cops like Serpico. They the cops don’t tolerate bad cops neither should we.

  3. I am NEVER quick to judge LEO’s. That said I think they in such a benign scenario you can’t justify what this office did. To try and justify any action that could potentially cost someone their life is ridiculous. This guy was to drunk to stand so therefore under control.

    • there’s probably a pig roast in WV sometime soon….this nazi cop can be the main dish, but only after his head and his family’s heads are bashed on the ground….the sweeter the better

  4. Notice whenever these FAKE HEROES-TERRORIST COPS never treats their DRUNKEN COPS in this EXCESSIVE FORCE TACTICS, we are profiled as POLICE PRIVATE PROPERTIES, = ANIMALS, PREYS, SLAVES PRISONERS OF WAR / We the CIVILIANS are the VOTERS and the TAX PAYERS, & we will mandate LEGAL REFORMS to HOUSE CLEAN these MNETALLY ILL COPS. This why the INDIANA SUPREME COURT 2012 say you must defend yourself whenthese TERRORIST COPS comes HOME INVASION. WE ARE NOT SLAVES and WE WILL NOT DIE ALONE and never be surprise see more DALLAS and LOUISIANAN SNIPERS vists these LOW IQ homes,

    • Don’t paint with a wide brush. While some sprocket are cogs and all cogs are cogs, not all cogs are sprockets. Many varied value doctrines within police forces, even among individuals. I know cops that would rather take a bullet than give it. And they are traumatized to the point of almost nervous breakdown when they have to. Are they terrorists? Fake heroes? No. These guys I know will also run into a burnging building to save someone without gear. Don’t lump them all in one category. That dude was just a prick. With a badge and no doubt out of uniform too. He deserves public ridicule.

      • Until it HITS HOME , when some TERRORIST COP RAVAGES your family and you, then you will pull out your head of your rectum, dwl just as in 2006 the FBI reported from their investigations of EXTREMIST GROUPS the KKK, NAZI, TERRORISTS and not including the the CHILD RAPIST, DRUG DEALERS, GERIATRIC RAPISTS, ANIMAL RAPISTS, ROAMING RAPISTS, SEX SLAVE TRADERS, you name them will be your HOST to RAPE YOU WITH A BADGE . EXPLAIN why the INDIANA SUPREME COURT SAY YOU MUST DEFEND YOURSELF FROM TERRORIST COPS AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning criminal law and procedure.

        Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:

        SECTION 1. IC 35-41-3-2, AS AMENDED BY P.L.189-2006,
        SECTION 1, IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE
        UPON PASSAGE]: Sec. 2. (a) In enacting this section, the general
        assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state to
        recognize the unique character of a citizen’s home and to ensure
        that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful
        intrusion by another individual or a public servant. By reaffirming
        the long standing right of a citizen to protect his or her home
        against unlawful intrusion, however, the general assembly does not
        intend to diminish in any way the other robust self defense rights
        that citizens of this state have always enjoyed. Accordingly, the
        general assembly also finds and declares that it is the policy of this
        state that people have a right to defend themselves and third
        parties from physical harm and crime. The purpose of this section
        is to provide the citizens of this state with a lawful means of
        carrying out this policy.

        (b) As used in this section, “public servant” means a person
        described in IC 35-41-1-17, IC 35-31.5-2-129, or IC 35-31.5-2-185.

        (c) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another
        any other person to protect the person or a third person from what the
        person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force.

        However, a person:

        (1) is justified in using deadly force; and

        (2) does not have a duty to retreat;

        if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent
        serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission
        of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal
        jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third
        person by reasonable means necessary.

        (b) (d) A person:

        (1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force,
        against another any other person; and

        (2) does not have a duty to retreat;

        if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent
        or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry of or attack on the
        person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.

        (c) (e) With respect to property other than a dwelling, curtilage, or
        an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable
        force against another any other person if the person reasonably
        believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate
        the other person’s trespass on or criminal interference with property
        lawfully in the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member
        of the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose
        property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:

        (1) is justified in using deadly force; and

        (2) does not have a duty to retreat;

        only if that force is justified under subsection (a). (c).

        (d) (f) A person is justified in using reasonable force, including
        deadly force, against another any other person and does not have a
        duty to retreat if the person reasonably believes that the force is
        necessary to prevent or stop the other person from hijacking,
        attempting to hijack, or otherwise seizing or attempting to seize
        unlawful control of an aircraft in flight. For purposes of this subsection,
        an aircraft is considered to be in flight while the aircraft is:

        (1) on the ground in Indiana:

        (A) after the doors of the aircraft are closed for takeoff; and

        (B) until the aircraft takes off;

        (2) in the airspace above Indiana; or

        (3) on the ground in Indiana:

        (A) after the aircraft lands; and

        (B) before the doors of the aircraft are opened after landing.

        (e) (g) Notwithstanding subsections (a), (b) and (c), (c) through (e),
        a person is not justified in using force if:

        (1) the person is committing or is escaping after the commission
        of a crime;

        (2) the person provokes unlawful action by another person with
        intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or

        (3) the person has entered into combat with another person or is
        the initial aggressor unless the person withdraws from the
        encounter and communicates to the other person the intent to do
        so and the other person nevertheless continues or threatens to
        continue unlawful action.

        (f) (h) Notwithstanding subsection (d), (f), a person is not justified
        in using force if the person:

        (1) is committing, or is escaping after the commission of, a crime;

        (2) provokes unlawful action by another person, with intent to
        cause bodily injury to the other person; or

        (3) continues to combat another person after the other person
        withdraws from the encounter and communicates the other
        person’s intent to stop hijacking, attempting to hijack, or
        otherwise seizing or attempting to seize unlawful control of an
        aircraft in flight.

        (i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a
        public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is
        necessary to:

        (1) protect the person or a third person from what the person
        reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;

        (2) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful entry
        of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied
        motor vehicle; or

        (3) prevent or terminate the public servant’s unlawful
        trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in
        the person’s possession, lawfully in possession of a member of
        the person’s immediate family, or belonging to a person whose
        property the person has authority to protect.

        (j) Notwithstanding subsection (i), a person is not justified in
        using force against a public servant if:

        (1) the person is committing or is escaping after the
        commission of a crime;

        (2) the person provokes action by the public servant with
        intent to cause bodily injury to the public servant;

        (3) the person has entered into combat with the public servant
        or is the initial aggressor, unless the person withdraws from
        the encounter and communicates to the public servant the
        intent to do so and the public servant nevertheless continues

        or threatens to continue unlawful action; or

        (4) the person reasonably believes the public servant is:

        (A) acting lawfully; or

        (B) engaged in the lawful execution of the public servant’s
        official duties.

        (k) A person is not justified in using deadly force against a
        public servant whom the person knows or reasonably should know
        is a public servant unless:

        (1) the person reasonably believes that the public servant is:

        (A) acting unlawfully; or

        (B) not engaged in the execution of the public servant’s
        official duties; and

        (2) the force is reasonably necessary to prevent serious bodily
        injury to the person or a third person.

        SECTION 2. An emergency is declared for this act.

      • That all sounds good but it doesn’t work (as Trump would say). A 30 yr cop explained it to me this way; As one old cop was explaining dirty cops to me, he said ok I can explain that “All damn dirty…If my partner murders his dope dealer and I turn my head and look the other way, what do that make me? There ya go all damn dirty!” I said no way, but then I busted the dirty cop red handed “What about Frank Serpico!” The cop did own up to it “You’re right, there was one good cop, I stand corrected there was one. Sad how that ended up for him…the one good cop.” So we just have to deal with bad cops the same way cops deal with bad untrustworthy cops like Serpico. They the cops don’t tolerate bad cops neither should we.

  5. I have seen bs after bs video on the net claiming excessive force.congratulations!I have finally seen one that is not fake news!The officer should at a minimum seek counseling.What an ass hat!

  6. That son of a bitch needs to lose his job and go to jail! He could have killed that kid. WTF! Where did he train? With the IDF?

  7. ok how many people need to have the shit kicked out of them before others stop standing up for the cops and finally question wheither or not or cops get enough descalation and compassion training?

  8. Drunks are wiggly sorts. They can’t keep still and always try to turn to try and slur their way out of the cuffs. He was just being an incredibly intoxicated goof. This guy was not being violent, nor displaying any indication that he planned to become violent. And even if he did, there is nothing he could have done due to his tiny stature and state of inebriation. Plus, when you sweep a drunk, they never are able to keep from eating pavement. Maybe it was instinct, years of trying to get the cuffs on quickly and not letting someone get their hands free and turning into the officer. I don’t think he was trying to harm the guy, just put him on the ground to stop his squirming. But he did it too hard and ended up slamming him on a hard surface. Way too much force for a small drunk guy, even if he didn’t mean to use that much oomph.

    Hell, less than 24 hrs ago, we had to arrest a guy that was reportedly threatening people with a gun(no gun found) but he was a big drunk idiot that wanted to fight us. While struggling to get the guy handcuffed, another officer put the cuffs on his wrist and closed the handcuffs on my finger as well as the guy’s wrist. It hurt like hell, so I am struggling to get my finger free before it broke. The officer thought it was the guy pulling away, but it was me. It was a clusterfuck, but it just proves that handcuffing drunks is not as easy as people think, especially when they are struggling or fighting. Busted a bunch of blood vessels in my finger and it is nice and bruised today.

    • If you don’t mind saying, what City or State do you work in. Me ? I’am in CA and had more than my share of encounters with the pd over the years, some ok and some not so, and have even known a few myself. But never have I been roughed up, or treated with violence, except when I was a kid protester in Berkeley over the Vietnam War, and we all got treated pretty much the same way in mass. Tear Gassed, Water Hosed And Buck Shot ! Or perhaps just lucky I suppose.

  9. Law enforcement is an arm of a government founded by the declaration of independence which states that when a goverment fails to meet the expectations of the people it is their right/duty to dissolve it and reinstate a new one.

    That said this police officer has admitted that its failing to meet expectation and I quote “Law enforcement cannot win with the people. If they shoot someone its murder. If they apprehend someone, its excessive force”

    At this point he needs to resign because he has admitted he cant do his job according to the expectations of who he serves to protect.

  10. This was uncalled for, I do believe some cops need to take extra force with some but this guy was clearly no threat, he can’t even stand up let alone resist! These kind of cops and yes I said these kind, ones who use excessive force when no need to, just like to take their authority to their head! I hope this poor fella slaps a law suit on the officers ass!!

    • Well from his looks alone I can tell that this cop fell in the category of being bullied as a kid so now he bullies others with a badge. I truly believe that most, not all, but most cops fit into 2 categories..1) they have always been bullies and now they just continue their ways. 2) They were bullied growing up and now it is their turn. However, I believe there still are a few that had a calling to help but the other 2 types have tarnished them ALL.

  11. THIS SCUM NAZI SKINHEAD PIG TOUGH WHEN SOMEONE CAN NOT FIGHT BACK , HE COULD HAVE KILLED THIS YOUNG MAN BY DOING WHAT HE DID ,BUT THE F——–G LAW WILL PROTECT PIGS LIKE HIM EVEN IF HE HAD KILLED THIS PERSON. PIGS R ABOVE ANY LAW IN THE U, S. EVEN THE US OF AMERICAN CONSTITUTION

    • Oh ya, hold on I have to reconsider everything now. If I was the cop and it was a clown coming from a birthday party, I’m afraid I would have just shot and asked questions later. That cop wasn’t cold and calm like a serial kill. he was terrified frozen in fear! Dam dwarfs! lol

  12. What’s so scary is the utter lack of concern from this cop. If the guy’s head had exploded and blown brains all over him, the cop wouldn’t have blinked.

    • Oh he probably would have turned around and kicked the corpse for getting his brains on him. Public Intoxication are generally mere city ordinances. I say, if there is no victim there is not crime. And this BS that society is the victim is ridiculous merely money makers for the city/state. Once upon a time there had to be a victim for there to be a crime but not today.

      And btw if is more dangerous to be a commercial fisherman than to be a cop…those are the facts!

  13. This is why you LOSE every time, because YOU LIE and MISREPRESENT FACTS. The suspect, while being handcuffed was RESISTING.

    • Wrong asshole, the fact that he is pissed and can’t stand still is the only problem there, he was not resisting in the slightest, It does not take fucking Einstein to figure that one out, and that fat bastard cop did not need to do that to the poor guy, he could have fractured his skull doing that shit, do don’t give me or anyone else your stupid bollocks idea of what that poor guy was or wasn’t doing, dubass !

      • No, he was resisting SLIGHTLY. It was a very weak effort, but he was definitely resistant. Did the level of resistance meet the level of force that was used? Was the level of force used appropriate escalation of force to the level of resistance? No.

        • Resisting? Too drunk to stand up I wouldn’t call resisting. If the cop would have waited a minute before playing Billy Jack the guy would have fallen down. There is no defense for beating up on a drunken midget. I wonder what he does to drunk young lady?

  14. Don’t defend the actions of that fat bastard cop, that was uncalled for, there are many ways to subdue a drunk person and slamming their head into the pavement is not one of them. I don’t give a shit if he has had a hard day, he swore an oath to serve and protect the public, not to break their heads. And don’t give me that blue privilege shite. There is too much corruption in the American police force and it’s about time it was fucking stopped, he is responsible for anything that happens to that guy, like it or not.

  15. Love to say I’m shocked by this but I’m NOT, all too often thanks to social media we are seeing these types of abuse and bullying tactics. This was completely uncalled for and this POS prick should lose his job for ASSAULT.

  16. Okay, SubvertedNationdonet? Where did you get an asinine remark like that? I’m Jewish and I worked a 30+ year law enforcement career. Many awards and no demerits. I am also a veteran of the U.S. Army and combat in Vietnam. I was with the 101st Airborne Division. I was four times wounded during combat operations in the A Shau Valley now remembered as the “Battle on Hamburger Hill”. What have you done except hate people because their genetics are different from yours? You may think of yourself as elite. The rest of the entire thinking civilized nation know you as a germ (bacteria!). You may be born in America – but you are nothing like an American! People whip the likes of you off their shoes when they step in a pile of you!

    • Thank you for your service! I commend you for your spotless record. I don’t know what that dude said to earn him that but I’ve seen a lot of comments that would be worthy of it. lol Sadly, people just lump everybody together. They don’t understand that the worst among you, who have no honor, decency, morals and are a black mark on the badge; have no commonality with the everyday Joe on the street. Sadly I think we see more of it now because there are not a lot of candidates anymore. So the counties and cities are recruiting guys straight out of the military and straight out off tours. And you and I both know that Uncle Sam doesn’t have a aftercare program for our troops worth a crap. They take care of you when you are in because they have to keep their equipment in good working order. After you are out though, the care at best is tersery. And there isn’t any real good debriefing that our soldiers go through now. Or ever really, but… There isn’t any decompression. These guys are coming back from having to shoot kids with bombs strapped to them. And then losing it on the sick ….well….that sent them out to meet their death. I ministered to a fella that happened to. He split. Fractured. Couldn’t even remember it happened for years. So you get guys hired on with an adrenaline addiction, no debriefing after traumatic situations, no decompression and then nobdoy but police forces want to hire our vets, so, eventually all that stuff seeps out on the little fellas like in this video. I def see his weak attempts at resistance but he could have put a foot to the back of the knee and put him down. Definitely overkill and I can only imagine how scrambled that poor drunk dude must be now. Sheesh. I don’t lump. 🙂

    • Who cares! Go peddle your self-righteous bullshit elsewhere! If you were ever a true “Professional LEO,” you know damn well this is excessive force! Actually, this is “deadly force” and you know it! Now, please go ahead and rebut with some more of your bragamony, keep digging a deeper hole for true pros to climb out of with your me, me, babble!

  17. well it sad but guess he took one for the team.i think after the police dept is sued and they will be they will settle out of court and the officer will be fired.its to bad he had to go through that to get the bad police off the streets.

  18. That’s why I don’t feel sorry for cops when they get shot! It’s called Karma for all the bad $hit they pull! Every time I see Americans celebrating July 4th and screaming this is the land of the free I laugh! We live in a police state…. That pig should be arrested and fired, he has no business being a police officer!

  19. I completely support the police. Dude wasn’t rolling out like the guy says. Is he very pathetically trying to pull away? Yeah. Was that amount of force necessary? No. That was a annoyed cop taking out his frustration on a drunk guy that couldn’t take or didn’t want to take instruction. Could he be charged with resisting? He wasn’t being submissive. Did he deserve to have his head BOUNCED on the ground and knocked out cold with a possible head injury FOR IT? No. That WAS excessive force and I don’t care that the cop was calm. Doesn’t take a cop raging to prove excessive force. You can be demeted and not at all enraged and blast a person. Put him on the ground? Sure. Knock him out cold from his head bouncing on the pavement? No.

  20. You people make me SICK! No wonder this country is in such a mess! Stand around pointing your phone’s and don’t to a da*^^ thing to help an officer in distress. This country would be great again if someone would have sprung into action and offered assistance to the officer such as “He’s still breathing officer, you better do this one…let me show you. Oh, ouch that hurt! You ok officer? Ok I’ll show you one more time in slow motion…Ya you got it, I call that move The A-Hole! Hello dispatch hello ah you better someone out here this fine officer got a 55 gallon drum of whoop ass on him I think…help! Bring his disability paperwork his days of sadistic pleasure are over I’m afraid. And all these sons of &^^^ out here just watched and didn’t do a da*&^ thing! Don’t mention it I try to help out wherever I can, unlike these sob’s out here…turn that camera off and delete that, can you help at all…Jesus Christ!” We have to make America great again. The next video I see of some cop rabbit punching some handcuffed old woman, I want to hear someone say “Turn off all your cameras now!” and then the next scene be “Help officer down Help! That woman said something smart to him about beating up old ladies and the next thing I seen he had his ass handed to him, that fast too. This country is going straight to hell when a young police officer can beat the hell out of an old handcuffed homeless woman without suffering the wrath of God for just doing his job. No wonder psychopaths don’t want to be cops I don’t blame them! Make America Great Again! Cheers !

  21. Disgusting I hope he policeman involved has been sacked. Makes you wonder at the age of him how many more victims there has been, and the audacity to restrain him while he has got handcuffs being put on. It should of been an ambulance he was phoning. EVIL BEYOND BELIEF. Looking at the intoxicated guy I thought it was a 12 year old boy at 1st. That is a very serious assault and one that could of been a murder charge,

  22. That is nothing more than a vulgar display of power. Disgusting to watch. This is a serious problem. Protect and serve, right? This man could have died from that blow to the head. His biggest crime – inebriation.

  23. Blatantly uncalled for. This cop’s actions are directly attributed to a law enforcement culture, at both police and district attorney departments, providing impunity.

  24. The Cop must be charged with attempted murder. Before trial he should be in solitary confinement in prison to keep him, fucking sociopath that he is, away from people.

  25. I don’t care if you are a present police officer or an ex police officer. That was uncalled for and unnecessary. You cant’ defend that. The cop evidently feared for his life. I don’t want my tax dollars arresting and jailing someone for a victimless crime such as being drunk in public. That’s just a waste all the way around. Police defending the police always talking about difficult their job is. It’s not difficult unless you want it to be.

  26. We as black people have been telling you all for decades now how something as simple as this video can escalate to people being killed by cops. If this guy turns around and starts resisting then this hot head cop is going to use really excessive force which could mean death. Does this cop fear for his life. And what harm is this guy causing?

  27. I just called and they said it was 2 years ago, the videos is edited and he is fine. There’s at least 1 lie in that statement.

  28. “The dude tried rolling out and the officer defused the situation by taking him to the ground to control him.”

    I watched it a second time, and “the dude” didn’t try “rolling out!” If the commenter is in law enforcement, then no wonder people have a hard time believing the police, sometimes!

  29. Gestapo tactics by jack booted thugs are not going to be tolerated by the people. These goons on the force are supposed to be public servants sworn to serve and protect. What’s worse is those other cops that standby and watch and even lie to cover for the brutes.

  30. The policeman used excessive force endangering the intoxicated man who had no way to protect his head and at the same time discrediting the police who are supposed to help keep the community safe not harm its members.

  31. Advocated thoughts.. based on a video….. police slamming a person on the ground,,,https://www.facebook.com/policethepoliceACP/videos/1984471498236503/

    lets analyze the situation by just a video, 1 what crime has he committed with a victim or property damage ?

    2 what crime did the officer commit under his delegated powers?

    The video- it appears that the officer detained illegally without even investigation a true actual crime, it appears that th officer arrived and rushed and body slammed and cuffed violated the person he is to protect and serve.

    What violations did the officer commit?

    He violated the persons privacy, and the persons 4th amendment , the persons due process clauses and the provisions of the actual law of the police powers.What crime did the officer committee? He committed violations against the peoples provisions that he swearer to protect.

    The last time i checked alcohol is not a crime and many years ago it was reversed and allowed to drink alcohol.

    According to the actual laws, provisions of the bill of rights, and the Amendments in our Constitutions that are in harmony. Wow.

    Police powers, 10 Amendment, locked law, 9th amendment, 4th amendment, even at a state level violations. Of the state constitutions provisions and protections. Wow..

    Violations of provisions- Civil Records

    _______________________________

    U.C.C. 1-207 w/o prejudice

    _______________________________

    Case #,________________________________________

    12/2/2017

    Grounds for dismissal

    Grounds to dismissal

    1.I waive no rights

    2.and I establish and declare that I am a beneficiary of the constitution of the United States of America and the state of Montana constitution.

    3.It’s confirmed by motion,and in writing a copy for appointed and assistant attorney and judge.

    4.I Claim the Remedy“The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such rights by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel.” (UCC 1-207.7)

    5. I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally.

    6. I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement.”

    7.Fact I am a private person.

    8.I live at the common law.

    9.I’m not participate in any tontine schemes and limited liability on a joint venture for profit with an insurable interest requiring me to participate in these corporate Ponzi schemes-

    10. I’m just a private person of Hamilton.

    11.I live on the block.

    12.I live at the common law as a private person.

    13.I have right to work and travel freely without any obstruction of my fundamental rights and my life liberty and to pursue happiness, without any encroachment and without infringing or dictated by any third arbitrary third party –

    14.let be recorded and summited into the common court I claim.

    15. I declare I have a right to work and travel and contract my labor and movement in modern time and my skills as I see fit without a third party arbitrary and capricious institution sees fit.

    16. Is the court bound to the oath of office according to the constitution? Article 6 paragraphs 2. Supremacy Claus-Also to the Montana preamble, and the Montana privacy amendments, and special amendments for veterans who has served.

    17. constitution section (______________________________) MT constitution (_________________________________________-

    18.(____________________________________)-all judges are bound to protect the oath of the constitutions.

    19.-Therefor I request for the statutes or codes(______________________________________)be construed to the Constitution.

    20.Therefore I have made a sufficient, timely, and explicit reservation of my rights at 1-207 1-308, I then insist that the statutes be construed in harmony with the Common Law I claim.

    21.I request that the court produce the injured person who has filed a verified complaint according to the due process clauses 5,6,7, in the bill of rights.

    22.Who was injured as a result of failure to this statutes or code,

    23.(________________________________). If the court can’t produce victim or property damage- I submit dismissal- I submit for grounds for dismissal.

    24.

    Grounds for dismissal: #1 no victim- #2 no property damage- #3 no crime committed- #4 codes or statues conflict with Constitution-

    25.

    #5 OFFICER’s (______________________________________)illegally seized MY PAPERS EFFECTS WITH OUT A CRIME BEING COMMITTED IN HIS PRESENTS and without due process first– THE TAKEN OF PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PPROCES OF LAW, NO SEARCH WARRANT EXPLAINING WHY OF TAKEN OF MY TRUCK BEFOR COURT PROCEDDINGS-misconduct with violations of the 4th amendment- And the 5th amendment- 6th amendment-

    Grounds for dismissal

    4th amendment grounds

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against UNREASONABLE searches and seizures, SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED, AND NO WARRANTS SHALL ISSUE, but upon PROBABLE CAUSE, supported by OATH OR AFFIRMATION, and particularity describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    I do not think it gets ANY CLEARER THAN THAT!!! THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO BE SECURE IN THEIR PERSONS, WALKING OR DRIVING DOWN THE STREET, HOUSES, THEIR HOMES BACKYARDS OR MOTEL ROOMS, PAPERS, RELATING TO THEIR BUSINESS MATTERS AND PERSONAL PRIVACY AND EFFECTS, WELL A CAR IS AN EFFECT, AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES OR SEIZURES, WHEN ARE WE UNREASONABLE, WHEN THERE IS NO WARRANT SUPPORTED BY OATH OR AFFIRMATION DESCRIBING IN DETAIL THE PLACE, PERSONS AND OR PROPERTY TO BE SEARCHED AND OR SEIZED. (Video for support) https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ETroXvRFoKY

    5th amendment grounds-

    Amendment Text | Annotations

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    6th amendment grounds-

    The 6th Amendment contains 7 specific protections for people accused of crimes. The 6th Amendment reads like this:

    “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defiance.”

    COLLECTED FACTS

    Norton V. Shelby County 118 U.S. 425 an unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights and poses no duties, affords no protections, and creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative though it had never been passed.

    ____________________________________________________the statues and codes under the unknown court is in question, as jurisdiction to. Declared a unconstitutional act, that is in conflict according to and under claimed common law, be construed to the beneficiary of the Constitution,

    Case law-US V. Bishop 412 U.S. 346 Defines willfulness as an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under law with immoral certainty- I am using the constitution and supreme court cases so I am not using evil motives or intents.

    Attorneys court of record -16th Andrews prudent second section 97 says that it shall be interpreted in my favor because I am the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary for the protection of my rights and property.

    Claimed,____________________________________I am a common private man, under requested common law due process.

    I live at the common law. I’m not participate in any tontine schemes and limited liability on a joint venture for profit with an insurable interest requiring me to participate in these corporate Ponzi schemes-

    I’m just a little Joe from Hamilton. I live on the block.

    I live at the common law. I have right to work and travel freely without any obstruction of my fundamental rights and my life liberty and to pursue happiness, without any encroachment and without infringing or dictated by any third arbitrary third party -let be recorded and summited into the common court I claim.

    Ask for legal determination from judge of provisions..

    Your honor may it please the court Plaintiff.(I____________________________________________________)U.C.C. 1-207 w/o prejudice U.C.c.1-203)

    Claim for the record,I motion for dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted. No negligence or intent or wiliness of a crime,or no victim or property damage to anyone who actually filed a Affidavit swearing to a complaint according to provisions.

    Signature,_____________________________________________

    Let the candid people , we the people document and record this for future civil issues upon the actual victim of infringement and encroachment history of the acts of institutions of the state of Montana.

    Third party over-watch, bill of rights advocate and self claimed Constitutional officer, spc/Kirkland 406-363-5284 [email protected]

    Full report and discovery collected ….

    Remedy and Recourse

    Every system of civilized law must have two characteristics: Remedy and Recourse. Remedy is a way to get out from under the law. The Recourse provides that if you have been damaged under the law, you can recover your loss. The Common Law, the Law of Merchants, and even the Uniform Commercial Code all have remedy and recourse, but for a long time we could not find it. If you go to a law library and ask to see the Uniform Commercial Code they will show you a tremendous shelf completely filled with the Uniform Commercial Code. When you pick up one volume and start to read it, it will seem to have been intentionally written to be confusing. It took us a long time to discover where the Remedy and Recourse are found in the U.C.C. They are found right in the first volume, at 1-207 and 1-103.

    Remedy

    “The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such rights by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel.” (UCC 1-207.7)

    It is important to remember when we go into a court, that we are in a commercial, international jurisdiction. If we go into court and say. “I DEMAND MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!”, the judge will most likely say, “You mention the Constitution again, and I’ll find you in contempt of court!” Then we don’t understand how he can do that. Hasn’t he sworn to uphold the Constitution? The rule here is: you cannot be charged under one jurisdiction and defend yourself under another jurisdiction. For example, if the French government came to you and asked where you filed your French income tax of a certain year, do you go to the French government and say “I demand my Constitutional Rights?” No. The proper answer is: “THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO ME. I AM NOT A FRENCHMAN.” You must make your reservation of rights under the jurisdiction in which you are charged, not under some other jurisdiction. So in a UCC court, you must claim your Reservation of Rights under UCC 1-207.

    UCC 1-207 goes on to say…

    “When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof, causes a loss of the right, and bars its assertion at a later date.” (UCC 1-207.9)

    You have to make your claim known early. Further, it says:

    “The Sufficiency of the Reservation: any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights is sufficient, such as “without prejudice”. (UCC 1-207.4)

    Whenever you sign any legal paper that deals with Federal Reserve Notes, write under your signature: “Without Prejudice (UCC 1-207.4).” This reserves your rights. You can show, at UCC 1-207.4, that you have sufficiently reserved your rights.

    It is very important to understand just what this means. For example, one man who used this in regard to a traffic ticket was asked by the judge just what he meant by writing “without prejudice UCC 1-207” on his statement to the court? He had not tried to understand the concepts involved. He only wanted to use it to get out of the ticket. He did not know what it meant. When the judge asked him what he meant by signing in that way, he told the judge he was not prejudice against anyone… The judge knew that the man had no idea what it meant, and he lost the case. You must know what it means!

    Without Prejudice UCC 1.207

    When you use “without prejudice UCC 1-207” in connection with your signature, you are saying, “I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally. I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement.”

    What is the compelled performance of an unrevealed commercial agreement? When you use Federal Reserve Notes instead of silver dollars, is it voluntary? No. There is no lawful money or alternative, so you have to use Federal Reserve Notes; you have to accept the benefit. The government has given you the benefit to discharge your debts with limited liability, and you don’t have to pay your debts. How nice they are! But if you did not reserve your rights under 1-207.7, you are compelled to accept the benefit, and are therefore obliged to obey every statute, ordinance, and regulation of the government, at all levels of government; federal, state and local.

    If you understand this, you will be able to explain it to the judge when he asks. And he will ask, so be prepared to explain it to the court. You will also need to understand UCC 1-103, the argument and recourse. If you want to understand this fully, go to a law library and photocopy these two sections from the UCC. It is important to get the Anderson, 3rd edition. Some of the law libraries will only have the West Publishing version, and it is very difficult to understand. In Anderson, it is broken down with decimals into ten parts and, most importantly, it is written in plain English.

    Recourse

    The Recourse appears in the Uniform Commercial Code at 1-103.6, which says:

    “The Code is complimentary to the Common Law, which remains in force, except where displaced by the code. A statute should be construed in harmony with the Common Law, unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the Common Law.” (UCC 1-103.6)

    This is the argument we use in court. The Code recognizes the Common Law. If it did not recognize the Common Law, the government would have had to admit that the United States is bankrupt, and is completely owned by its creditors. But, it is not expedient to admit this, so the Code was written so as not to abolish the Common Law entirely. Therefore, if you have made a sufficient, timely, and explicit reservation of your rights at 1-207, you may then insist that the statutes be construed in harmony with the Common Law.

    If the charge is a traffic ticket, you may demand that the court produce the injured person who has filed a verified complaint. If, for example, you were charged with failure to buckle your seat belt, you may ask the court: “Who was injured as a result of your failure to ‘buckle up’?” However, if the judge won’t listen to you and just moves ahead with the case, then you will want to read to him the last sentence of 103.6, which states: (2) Actually, it is better to use a rubber stamp, because this demonstrates that you had previously reserved your rights. The simple fact that it takes several days or a week to order and get a stamp shows that you had reserved your rights before signing the document. Anderson Uniform Commercial Code Lawyers’ Cooperative Publishing Co. The Code cannot be read to preclude a Common Law section. Tell the judge, “Your Honor, I can sue you under the Common Law, for violating my rights under the Uniform Commercial Code. I have a remedy, under the UCC, to reserve my rights under the Common Law. I have exercised the remedy, and now you must construe this statute in harmony with the Common Law. To be in harmony with the Common Law, you must come forth with the damaged party.”

    If the judge insists on proceeding with the case, just act confused and ask this question: “Let me see if I understand, Your Honor, has this court made a legal determination that sections 1-207 and 1-103 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which is the system of law you are operating under, are not valid law before this court?”

    Now the judge is in a jam! How can the court throw out one part of the Code and uphold another? If he answers, “yes”, then you say: “I put this court on notice that I am appealing your legal determination.” Of course, the higher court will uphold the Code on appeal. The judge knows this, so once again you have boxed him in.

  32. OMG…yeah the cop was calm all the way through but he knows he used excessive force. He is a huge man and this drunk guy was very small. Shame on you officer. Does your ego feel good?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here