Law and order enthusiasts rave about enforcing the little crimes (gum on the sidewalk, graffiti, etc) to eliminate the bigger crimes- the broken window theory, but make excuses every time a cop (or group of cops) violates the public trust.

I have no problem with the broken window theory, but it should *especially* be applied to cops. Look, what these cops did was felony assault (no weasel language). It should have been stopped, they should be charged not only with the assault, but also with the falsifying the arrest report (which is likely a felony).

“We thought based on the facts and the evidence, including the videotape, that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction at trial,” said Lee Cohen, assistant state attorney in charge of misdemeanor cases.

How about “we knew the charges were bullshit so we threw them out”?

These guys live in a different world…

The all important timing of the events.

The officer states that he approached, then conversed with Ortiz, THEN Ortiz ‘got in his face’.

When it’s clear that what happened was the officer approached confrontationally (By confrontationally, I mean violating the personal area around Ortiz with intent to intimidate) Then, immediately, shoved Ortiz to the rear of the elevator.

Clearly, Ortiz is no saint. Lipping off to cops is just dumb, but being a confrontational, aggressive cop willing to escalate a situation where de-escalation was clearly called for… is much worse.

He further lied about the arrest part, Ortiz was pinned to a wall, off balance, not turning to fight.

Then, to make it even more obvious that there is a blue line, the other cop (The one that punched him) cooked his statement to match that of the first officer.

I’ve been on over 15,000 911 calls as a paramedic and a firefighter/paramedic. I’ve been compelled to testify in civil rights violations cases. I’ve seen lots of shitty cops. I’ve seen some amazing cops. Good cops look for ways to de-escalate a situation. It’s less paperwork. They don’t get hurt. The public doesn’t get hurt.

There was no attempt to de-escalate the situation. These guys are supposed to be trained professionals, yet this is the best response they can muster? I love how easily the department swept this under the rug after their ‘investigation’.

‘While I’m sad he broke his nose, and I think the cops ought to be fired, hopefully Ortiz learned a valuable lesson most of us learned in elementary school: don’t fight cops.’

Maybe Ortiz was doing what responsible citizens are supposed to do- maybe he questioned authority. The police did not have the right to physically assault a citizen, especially ones who committed no crime. Ortiz clearly was the victim of police abuse.

If you mean it’s legal grounds, of course it is. A barking dog is legal grounds for shooting it, according to cops.

Whether or not it’s good police work depends on what the guy is yelling and what kind of a move he makes. The “move” Ortiz made in the video was the same kind of “move” we seen MLB managers make towards umpires every season.

While I’m sad he broke his nose, and I think the cops ought to be fired, hopefully Ortiz learned a valuable lesson most of us learned in elementary school: don’t fight cops.

While the cops wish everyone would follow this rule in all circumstances, again, it depends on the situation (I can think of several situations in which cops need to be fought). Ortiz got hit in the face before he had a chance to resist his arrest, so there’s no way to know if he could have avoided a broken nose or not.

While I’m sad he broke his nose, and I think the cops ought to be fired, hopefully Ortiz learned a valuable lesson most of us learned in elementary school: don’t fight cops.

From the report:

“As I approached Ortiz to take him into custody, Ortiz spun around to face me and assumed a fighting stance (both left and right hand clenched into fists and body bladed),” he wrote.”

In the video it’s clear that Ortiz neither clenches his fists nor gets into a “body bladed” position. It’s perfectly clear.

What in the video contradicts anything the police said in the article?

Marty seems to think that since cops in other situations make mistakes and violate rights, then the cops in this situation did, too. He seems to think that since other people are victims of police abuse, then Ortiz is, too. Obviously those don’t follow, and there’s evidence here to prove it. Would I want my son beaten by police? Of course not. Would I expect my son to be if he bowed up on a police officer and resisted arrest? Yes. Did the cops go too far here? Yes. Did they have the right to engage physically? Absolutely.

The police falsified a report and should be swiftly and severely punished (I voted for “fired” on the poll). But Ortiz is not innocent the way many of the people Radley covers are. He did resist, and he got dealt with. He gets very little sympathy with me.

CNBC’s Jim Cramer supports Drug Legalization
http://drugwartreason.blogspot.com/2009/03/cnbcs-jim-cramer-supports-drug.html

Stewart asserted; ‘There’s a market for cocaine and hookers, so what?’ Edited out of the aired program Cramer, jabbing a finger into the air for emphasis, blurted out “I think those should be legalized”.

See the video at the link above.

And my new animation:
President Barack Obama’s Drug Warrior “sort of” Harm Reduction
http://drugwartreason.blogspot.com/2009/03/president-barack-obamas-drug-warrior.html

Enjoy.

No kidding! I guess adults who read Harry Potter, watch cartoons, pretty much play any other video games and eat brightly colored candy are just doing so to prey on children too. The epitome of hysteria. I am so embarrassed for our species that we have idiots like that among its members.

…

How about, “”We thought based on the facts and the evidence, including the videotape, that the cops royally fucked up and we’ll be pursuing charges against them.”

Yes, that would have been the right thing to say, Mr. Cohen.

No, wait, we already avoid Missouri like the plague. (Actually, living in New Mexico, we avoid Missouri more than we avoid the plague.)

or, if they stop by your house and ask for directions, or, if a snitch lies and says you’re a drug dealer, or, if you’re the wrong ethnicity, or, if you’re deaf, or, if you’re a 16 y.o. kid caught drinking beer, or, if you take pictures of cops, or, if you videotape traffic stops, or, if you skateboard on the sidewalk, or, if you’re a teenaged girl and you kick your shoe at a cop, or, if you’re only handcuffed and the BART cop feels you should be dead, or, if you don’t pull your car over quick enough and the officer decides to start ramming your mini-van with your kids in it, or, if the SWAT team decides to shock and awe your property and your dogs, or, if you decide to play poker with some friends, or, if you decide to ride a bicycle in New York, or,…

‘The video clearly confirms what the cop said in the article.’ Bullshit. The lying fuckers would’ve gotten a conviction if not for the video. Imagine if this was your son being smacked around physically and legally by these thugs!

Law and order enthusiasts rave about enforcing the little crimes (gum on the sidewalk, graffiti, etc) to eliminate the bigger crimes- the broken window theory, but make excuses every time a cop (or group of cops) violates the public trust.

I respectfully disagree with your post, Greg.

My bad, I guess, but your comment was pretty vague. Most of the time people write stuff like that it’s directed at Radley (I think the “minus 1″ indicates I wasn’t the only person who thought that).

Massive LOL @ you.

Yes, they did need to falsify the report. Ortiz didn’t assault the officer, nor was he hindering an investigation. The cops came to HIM and got all up in his face, when he refused to cower, they beat him.

There was no reason for the officers to enter the elevator except to attempt to escalate the situation.

‘resisting arrest’? WTF? He was never under arrest. ‘Assault’? WTF? It was the officer who assaulted him by walking up and getting in his face, then… when that didn’t work, ramming him into the back of the elevator. terrorizing other people in the process.

The officer acted in an unprofessional, arrogant manner, then tried to cover that up.

Here’s where he lied, and why: (From the report)

“I then walked to Ortiz and met him at the entrance of the elevator. I advised him he needed to leave because he wasn’t part of the incident. Ortiz continued to yell at me then walked right up to me hitting his nose to my nose.”

He lied to make it look like he was very calm and reasonable, allowing a pause between his walking up and Ortiz ‘assaulting him’ so he could say what he claims to have said.

What actually happened was the Officer walked right up to Ortiz in a confrontational manner, and when Ortiz didn’t immediately back down, proceeded to assault Ortiz by shoving him to the rear of the elevator.