Would Officer Robinson's crime have been any different if he had accidentally killed Mr. Vasquez in that attack? You could very easily kill a 76 year old man with a tackle and tasering like that. You could also induce a heart attack or any number of other medical issues. Is it so hard to believe that Mr. Vasquez could just as easily have been crippled as a result of this incident? Does the fact that Mr. Vasquez will probably recover just fine from this attack somehow mitigate what Officer Robinson did? I don't think so.

How about this for an idea. How about we give Officer Robinson some anger management classes and more training, as you suggested in another post, before we turn him loose on the public again? When he kills somebody the next time around, how are you going to feel about him then?

I am not overreacting at all. As far as I am concerned, Officer Robinson's badge does not provide him with any kind of shield when he breaks the same laws that you and I would go to jail for. The fact that you would excuse or somehow rationalize his behavior is actually scarier than what he did. Exactly how much tyranny are you willing to accept?

You know how people are always intimating that the rape victim is partly to blame because she wore a short skirt or perfume or attention getting earrings or whatever? That's kinda what it sounds like to me when you try to lay some of the blame for this felonious assault at Mr. Vasquez's feet. Like the proverbial rape victim, he was asking for it, right?

To be clear, Mr. Vasquez did nothing, zero, zip, zilch, nada, not one single thing to deserve this beating. What Officer Robinson did is a felony, and he should be held accountable for that felony at least to the same degree that an average citizen would be. When I say "at least to the same degree", I mean that he could, and probably should, be punished more harshly because his crime was done under color of law. That makes this simple battery case an aggravated battery case as far as I am concerned with the aggravating circumstances being that A) Officer Robinson was armed with a deadly weapon and B) the attack was done under color of law giving Mr. Vasquez, or anyone else for that matter, no right to defend himself.

You simply cannot in good conscience assign one single iota of blame for this to Mr. Vasquez. It is all on Officer Robinson. There is no gray area here.

1. What would have happened if Vasquez had simply stayed in his vehicle and explained to the officer what was going on? The whole incident would never have escalated. To 100% excuse Vasquez' culpability in this is more than any rational person would accept.

2. First, refer to #1 above. Then re-read my comments where I suggest that this officer needs additional training before being returned to duty. I am not excusing him for his overreaction, but again, I can not place 100% responsibility on him, as it was Mr. Vasquez' actions that initiated the confrontation.

3. Then I advise you to offer your legal services to Mr. Vasquez and sue the police department. But the courts do NOT treat police officers acting in their official capacity the same as common citizens, so your argument there is a red herring. As for the rest of your viewpoint, you refuse to allow any of the blame for this situation to fall on the actions of Mr. Vasquez. I wish you well in arguing that as a litigator in a court of law.

"...actions would still be criminal".

You obviously do not understand either criminal or civil law. If you wanted to go after this officer for battery or aggravated battery, you are going to face the stout opposition of self-defense. You are also going to have to explain what necessitated your client to exit from the vehicle in the absence of a police directive to do so. As counsel, you are going to have to explain why your client didn't immediately obey a law enforcement directive to pull over. It will be the same if you attempt to charge the officer with excessive use of force. Let me know when you win your lawsuit and collect your payout.

Again, I think both parties in this matter hold partial blame for the incident and both should use it as a learning opportunity and move on. Mr. Vasquez will be more attentive to law enforcement requests, and the officer will gain valuable experience on how to deal with people.

I did
not see the same video I think. The man did get out of his car. There is no law stating you can 't. This put your hands on the wheel speak when spoken to nonsense is the kind of thinking that....well I 'm not going to even say it...protect yourselves people. Don 't submit to a roadside body cavity search EVER

I just completely do not see what you see in this video. Are we training police to over -react first, ask questions following multiple tazings? Actually I don 't blame the officer. He is trained to react and respond this way. He goes through these scenarios over and over to deaden his humanistic response. They are being trained like we train warriors for war. Why is that?

Indeed Beav!

Exactly!! +1

Why? You're both dead wrong.

Is a 23 year old violent thug with no common sense the kind of person we want to give a gun and badge to? Do you want to bet your life on this guy not beating the crap out of you for no reason? To me this is a case of fool me once, shame on you. Now, you're fired and charged with the very same crimes any other citizen would be charged with if they had done the exact same things. That way, you're off the force and behind bars with the rest of the animals where you belong. Then, I don't have to worry about you fooling me again.

1. The cop was wrong. Period. End of story. He was wrong to pull him over in the first place because he did not know the law he was supposedly enforcing and he was dead wrong to initiate a violent response to a man who had done absolutely nothing to deserve it. That you can say Mr. Vasquez was wrong in any way here is laughable.

2. If that cop can't evaluate the situation any better than this knuckledragging fool did, why would you want him on the police force at all? Are you suggesting that a 23 year old violent thug with no common sense is the kind of raw material that can be trained into being a good cop? Really?

3. If you or I did to Mr. Vasquez what Officer Robinson did, we'd be charged with aggravated battery and very likely serve some jail time. What Officer Robinson did is a crime, and by definition, that makes him a criminal. On what planet, is a good idea to do some mamby pamby anger management training and a few ride-a-longs before unleashing this terrorist back onto the community?

If Mr. Vasquez were a 260 lb youngster, Officer Robinson's actions would still be criminal. What freakin' difference does it make that he was a frail 76 year old man? Mr. Vasquez never did a single thing that warranted being tackled and tasered. Are you suggesting that it is OK to beat the crap out of every 260 lb dude for no justifiable reason because a cop is a pantywaist who is afraid of his own shadow? I'm sorry, but the stupidity of that comment really makes me angry. That you immediately start to divvy up blame onto both parties and advocate for some insignificant administrative punishment while leaving this thug in uniform is sickening to me. He should be fired immediately and charged with the crimes that he is obviously guilty of. He has no business with a gun and a badge. It is as simple as that.

One thing that drives me insane is the neverending parade of apologists for the police. It never stops.

-- They have a tough job.
-- They put their lives on the line.
-- They are underpaid.
-- Always just comply with them, regardless of how wrong they are. If you do, nobody will get hurt.
-- Always show them respect, no matter what they do.
-- etc. etc. etc.

My personal favorite is the old truism that there are only a few bad cops and that we should never judge the cops in general by the well publicized actions of a few. In other words, no matter what happens, do NOT believe your own eyes and ears.

Bad cops CANNOT exist in a vacuum. They are surrounded by law enforcement all day every day, yet it is extremely rare that one cops unprofessional or even criminal actions will ever be acted upon by another cop. It just doesn't happen. The kinds of things that you and I would serve hard time for is considered routine and unworthy of note by these clowns. In cop culture, kicking ass and taking names is encouraged, nevermind how criminal those actions may be.

The way I see it, there are 3 kinds of cops.

Class 1 - The true bad apples who love nothing more than to use that badge to beat the crap out of people as often as possible. A subgroup of Class 1 would be the guys that get off knowing they can get away with all sorts of graft by virtue of a badge and gun. These guys make up a tiny percentage of the police force. For them, it is all about power. Some people are born to be Class 1s and some grow into over time. Either way, these guys are trouble on stilts.

Class 2 - This class makes up the overwhelming majority of the police force. These are the guys that we are supposed to not paint with the broad brush while we are discussing the cops in Class 1. The problem for me is that the guys in Class 1 can not exist within the departments in which they serve if the guys in Class 2 didn't always have their backs. While a Class 2 guy might not be on the take or unnecessarily violent, you can always count on him to A) look the other way, B) lie on the witness stand or on official reports, or C) at a very minimum remain silent when the Class 1 guys are doing their thing. Within cop culture, it is always an Us vs. Them thing, and no matter how egregious the action any cop does, a Class 2 guy will never stand up for an average citizen against another cop. Law enforcement simply does not apply to other cops, no matter what. Put another way, there just aren't enough Serpicos who will speak up from behind the Blue Wall.

Class 3 - The new guys. Most (not all) cops start out as bright eyed hero wannabes who just want to do good in the world. They do their training, then they become probationary officers for awhile as they hit the streets. Under veteran officers, they learn quickly that to survive as a cop, you always back up another cop. ALWAYS. These guys lose their cherry soon enough and quickly find themselves as either a Class 2 guy in the brotherhood or as a civilian doing something else with their lives. No matter how well meaning these guys are, they don't stay Class 3 for very long. They either accept cop culture and or they reject it within the first couple months in uniform.

Now, none of what I am saying here is backed up by any research whatsoever, but does anybody really deny the truth of it? Bad cops do not exist in a vacuum. They just don't. To me, that means you have a few criminals in uniform and a whole bunch of guys who will aid and abet the few at every turn.

What's worse is that the culture of supporting cops no matter what they do extends far beyond the ranks of the police. Every "tough on crime" legal eagle, superstar wannabe DA will stand up for the cops. Every politician will stand by the cops. Every judge will stand by the cops. Pretty much every time a cop finds himself in trouble, the system is rigged to get them out of trouble. In a cop's word vs. an average citizen accuser's word, the cop wins 100 times out of 100. Cops only lose when their actions/words are recorded. Absent video or audio, a cop always get the benefit of the doubt with plausible deniability.

Follow what happens from the dashcam footage in the story above. Then ask yourself a few questions. Was that officer right to initiate violence against that man? Forget that he is 76. I mean ANY man. Did the man do anything at all to deserve that attack? Will that officer be punished? How will he be punished? Restricted duty, suspension, additional training, criminal sanctions? My money says some weak administrative punishment and no criminal charge whatsoever. Further, the only reason he will get any punishment at all is that this dashcam video is embarassing to the PD. Without that, nothing at all would happen to this guy. My money says this cop gets a wrist slap and no criminal charge.

Now, tell me where I am wrong.

I don't think it's 50/50 depending on where you're at, but there's been a number of cases reported this year of people calling the police for help with mentally disturbed family members that have wound up dead. Some mental health supporters are recommending that if there's a problem in the home with such a person, do not call 911, get other family members, even neighbors to help. There's even been a few nursing home 911 calls that have led to the same result.

Well stated K! I am with you on this. And there would be no reason to have pulled this person over if there was no registration tax. Okay, so a license plate is good but why do we have to pay every year. More money for the state is the only reason.

This is depressing. If I'm in a bad neighborhood, or encounter a bad situation, viewing a police cruiser coming down the street would have been looked at by me as the Lone Ranger riding to the rescue. Now it seems that I might have a 50/50 chance that I'd be in trouble as well as those in the situation.

Herb; Believe it or not, I don't even have to search to be confronted with articles about this and new events nearly everyday. That of course is weighted for the news sources I typically check on. The biggest problem we face is that there is no required reporting of these incidents and no national data base to track. If it weren't for cell phones and Youtube, we wouldn't know about many of these at all.

I was just trying to get inside that one officer's head.
I was once what you could call a prison cop, since our trainers liked to call corrections officers "the largest police force in Alabama."
Don't care to see a bully with a badge. I never was one. Did get into a few violent situations though. Almost got killed once.

How Prevalent??
More than is acceptable, but not as bad as the headlines make it look. At least in my opinion

I agree as to it being a problem, but have reservations about how large the problem really is.

Lets look at some numbers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou...

This link's info is drawn from the 2012 Labor Dept stats, so likely under reported rather than over.

This lists 780,000 police officers.


Finding hard numbers on incidents from a "reputable" source is problematic .Following link is a CATO institute project

http://www.policemisconduct.net/2010-npm...


From January 2010 through December 2010 the National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project recorded 4,861 unique reports of police misconduct that involved 6,613 sworn law enforcement officers and 6,826 alleged victims.

4,861 – Unique reports of police misconduct tracked
6,613 - Number of sworn law enforcement officers involved (354 were agency leaders such as chiefs or sheriffs)
6,826 - Number of alleged victims involved
247 – Number of fatalities associated with tracked reports

Interesting thing in this data....
#Victims > #Police involved -- 1.03 slightly over 1
#Vicims > #Incidents -- 1.4/incident

A-Hole rate of 0.8% given those admittedly rough numbers.

P.S. 2010 was the highest year for these incidents

I find articles almost daily.

I was being facetious :)

And the beatings will continue until moral improves!

There is quite a distance between being polite with someone, and to respect someone. Not having respect for the badged thug whose hand is toying with his taser trigger while eyeing the inside of the car for possible "probable causes" is not incompatible with using polite language until he takes off for another potential prey...