An incident happened at Breaktime Sports Grill & Pub on Salisbury Blvd. two Friday nights ago. A cab driver discharged a passenger at that restaurant and called Police to say he thought the man had a gun. The police respond like storm troopers, didn't tell the management or door men what they were doing. They ran over to a man that fit the description, tackled him to the floor hurt the mans leg and back. Because he wouldnt stand up on their say so, they drug him through the restaurant, to the parking lot only to find out it was the wrong man. They uncuffed him and left the place not telling anyone what the hell was going on, and didn't go back in to find the gun. Is this the way it should be handled?
When I looked this up on the SPD Website, I cannot seem to find the call ever coming in? I did find this around the same time though. Does this sound like a MV accident though? 11/9/2007 23:05 1009 S Salisbury Bv M/V Accident PD 200700037834 Marrs Report
Playing that night was a band called the craze.
20 comments:
Just as bad as beating and pulling your gun on a handicap man for a "knife" huh!!!
This is what you get when you have a department where 85% of the officers have less than three years expierience. You have Officers with less than 18 months of road expierience training new recruits. What expierience do they have to pass on. Sounds like a brutality complaint and a lawsuit.
ateleast they did not tazer him
First of all an explanation for why they are there is not needed. Second of all if someone matches a description they have every right to detain the person until they get proper identification. And if the person was not guilty it would have been as simple as letting them make sure and you would be released from detainment.
Dont think there will be a lawsuit here. If there is, from this short story it doesnt sound like they were legally wrong. Moraly? Ethically? Maybe, but not legally.
Imagine what will happen when I tell them it was someone named Albero with a big camera, too. -- ROTFLMAO!
Oh no Don't Taz' me bro!!!!!! Locked a guy up once got sued he was in a wheelchair ( quadrapalegic Sp? ) later that night his injuries were so painful to his feet and legs he screamed all night long in pain! This was testified to by the guy in an adjacent cell. Suit was Federal for violation of a countless number of his civil rights asked for 10 million. OOOOPPPPPSSSS!!!!! He had pain in his feet and legs from injuries to his feet and legs that had NO FEELING IN THEM HE HAD NO FEELING FROM UPPER CHEST AREA DOWN!!!!!!!!!!! HE PICKED THE WRONG INJURY I THINK HE HAD BRAIN DAMAGE!!!!!!!!
I was there that night, the guy was tackled right beside my pool table. The doormen did know what was going on because they were right next to the cops when they took the guy down. As for the guy being hurt, when he came back in he was laughing and joking about the whole ordeal, and didn't seem to be hurt at all.
I agree anonymous 343, but i think your percentages are on the sarcastic side. There are alot of young, new cops, and yes young, field training officers but the ones that have under 6 years on the road are highly decorated natural cops. There is not one fto with less than 4 years experience. young can be as negative as it is good.
I love how this incident by SPD was so negative and the only side joe is reporting came from who knows who. Yet when the departments (with leaders he likes) get nice headlines...when all parties involved other than the officers say it was inappropriate!
Chiefy won't let anyone speak to me. I would NEVER put one of the SPD Officers on the line for the other side at this point and get them in trouble. HOWEVER, they are welcome to come here and comment IF there's anything different about this story. Joe
In a free world you would think that they could speak freely here.....
joe gets his info from "who knows who" its correct! comments from the man who said he was there. and said the person draged out came back in laughing. well he came back in!and how do you know what he said to management about his leg and back. the resturant offered to call him a ambulance. but he refused.and if you can read the doormans minds, read mine! doorman did not know. I KNOW THAT! the question is why does spd response call sheet NOT REFLECT THAT THEY WERE THERE???? and if they were after a man with a gun, why did they leave and NOT LOOK FOR THE SO-CALLED GUN??????? AND if they have a report they should investigate it, not jump the man handcuff him and drag him through the building. AND AGAIN THEY WERE WRONG!!!! MAYBE SOMEONE SHOULD SAY YOU HAVE A GUN AND LET THEM DO THAT TO YOU AND THEN SEE WHAT YOU SAY!!the anonymous person next to him and heard him laughing about it, do you know him? if so whats his name? lets ask him how he felt about it.before you say joe has stuff all wrong. make sure you know what your talking about. anyone else see this happen? comment here. why does spd say it never happened?
anonymous 458pm you sound like a spd officer. and an explanation is needed if i ask and am a tax paying citizen. this is exactly why spd is running wild, and public relations is at the bottom of the barrel. and if your a police officer and know exactly what happened and why they say it DIDNT! then share that with all of us. and if your the cheif then say who you are if you are right...
ok, concernedcitizen....
A guy calls in to the SPD that a guy he dropped off has a gun on his person. ANY person in their right mind would not go up to a citizen believed to be carrying a weapon and wait for him to reach in his pockets for identification before being patted down, he was asked to stand up, he refused. Thats called obstructing and hindering. Its called a terry stop, based on description alone and explanation before the incident is under control is not necessary. The officer would be risking his/her life and everyone elses in the bar that night if he/she didnt make sure that first and foremost they didnt get him out of the bar and checked. He matched the description, at that point as any officer would be responsible for the safety of everyone in that bar. So therefore the officers acted reasonable. If the situation had been different,had they found a weapon on his person, would anyone be complaining??? Probably not, being a tax-paying citizen doesnt give you a get out of jail free card, or a I can carry a weapon card! As a tax paying citizen I expect this to be done with NO chances taken. As long as an explanation at some point is given, than the officers did their job. If SPD wanted to cover this up, they sure as hell wouldnt have let him back in the bar! They could have locked him up for the simple obstructing and hindering. As far as it being listed as a MARRS Report, unless we know what the initial call was for (could've been a traffic incident that lead up to the cab driver telling the officers)NO ONE can say for sure they are covering anything up.
11/9/2007 23:01 E Philadelphia Av/Benton St Robbery: Firearm, Hwy 200700037833 Under Invst
The whole situation was a follow up of this above call, which is listed and not covered up!! The suspect was known to have left in a white salisbury taxi that was headed there. The cab driver pointed to and positively identified the guy.
Anonymous.....I agree with everything you said...except for one thing. You said they could have locked him up. I say they SHOULD have locked him up. Just to cover thier own a$$es. Once the actions of the suspect required the use of force by the officers, they should have placed him under arrest for obstructing. As the suspect further resisted, tack on resisting. When it goes to court, he would have been convicted of resisting beyond a reasonable doubt. The "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof is much higher than "preponderance of the evidence" which is required in a civil proceeding. Therefore, the actions of the officers would have already been scrutinized by a competent court which holds them to a higher standard than a civil proceeding. The defendant, would have no legal standing for a lawsuit provided the amount of force used by the officers was reasonable in light of all the circumstances, as it appears.
unless you have talked directly to the taxi driver, AS I HAVE! YOU ARE DEFINATLY A POLICE OFFICER...also didnt they risk everyones life in the bar by leaving and not finishing what they were there for? it is a terry stop? what exactly is a terry stop? and they can walk up to that man and say, sir we need to talk to you please dont put your hands in your pocket. then if he makes some abnormal move, jump him. thats reasonable. I dont care what you say in defense of them. the point is why is it not part of public record, if they have nothing to hide? thats their phrase when i dont want them in my car. If no ones covering up a mistake,maybe some respectable spd officer will answer these questions. i happy you have so much faith in the spd, and respect them so. But i have the right to feel differently.
Anonymous @ 5 PM:
The SPD put a GPS beeper on Joe's camera when he was not paying attention, so they always know where he is!
Concerned citizen..
I am not a cop but do have a background myself and in my family in the field. I dont want to, nore will i take away your right to your feelings. Yes, some people may feel that talking him out would have been more appropriate, but my point was simply that they didnt have to! A terry stop is when you have reasonable suspicion and you have the right to pat them down if you have a reason to believe they are carrying a weapon. He was identified and a gun was not found on him, therefore they didnt need to go back in. Some cops would have, some obviously dont.
Grandad...
You hit the nail on the head. He didnt want to cooperate then he is going to jail, especially after being identified as a suspect.
to have a background in law enforcement,thats something to be proud of. im not being smartass.but the spd have gone downhill with the public and with myself because of years of bad incidence.when i was a child i wanted to be a police officer, but few children now say that.they are and should be a public service and they act like(only my opion from my personal treatment)they could care less what the public thinks of them. they should be proud and do the best job they can, without being ASSHOLES to everyone. everyone isnt carring a gun or planning to hurt them. some of us or atleast i used to respect them.
Dont worry concerned some us still believe in what we do down to our bones. And I obviously am proud of the job my colegues and I do. I would say by the responses I get from other LEOs on this sight I'm too proud. But it's more than getting it done on the street, but winning in court. I always believed that police officers should be the example of the people they get paid to serve. Times have changed, but I truly believe that there is still hope. If not, I would have left a long time ago. It breaks my heart to see another officer mess up on, and off the job. But that is life and some keep going, trying to make up for it. Others sadly get worse and skate by. I just hope I can do the same in my career as my father before me did as professional firefighter. If not, I will risk my life trying, just as my father gave his.
NY
Post a Comment