DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
9 comments:
Just one more case where the officers' cameras, both body and vehicle, would have told more to complete the story. Their mistake in not having either of them in operation to record the event.
Dave wasn't even bothered by the taser, yet was calm and unresponsive to their brutality!
And I am sure SP camera's won't be on or will be malfunctioning a lot of the time also.
I'm not sure what case law they are citing requiring a uniformed officer to show three forms of ID. She said they noticed they were be "followed by police officers" I would have to assume they were then in a marked car. And followed is also possibly another way to "being pulled over". Bad choices made by roadside lawyers usually don't work out well for them...
9:35 you are wrong on many levels. It could have been an UNMARKED car with lights.
He took the correct action by driving slowly to a well lit and otherwise occupied area.
I assume her description is partly based on the after fact. Don't over analyze when you weren't there and have no clue.
9:35 funny how you do not mention the fact that the police intended to do harm and knew it because none of them had their cameras running.
I believe this was the intent since the occupants did not immediately stop on a dark road and made the decision to find a safer area.
At the end of the video you can clearly see the higher ranking officer's discontent and the lower officer scrambling when it is revealed that the cameras were not running and the only video evidence was hers.
Certainly is not good that cops cameras were not on, but you say it is a fact officers intended to do harm?? Were you there? How is that fact? As far as driving to well lit area, that is fine, I would... But in three miles they had an opportunity to dial 911 and report the situation. They would have been told that it was actually police officers stopping them. Why not call, they were obviously very concerned with their safety... Just a couple of people looking for a payday..
10:11
Only reason not to turn your camera on is because you intend on hiding something. I do not need to be there to know that fact.
If I was on a highway in the same scenario, I can not attest that I would think to call 911, although I do understand that point.
1011, yes, I agree, They enticed a situation, but the cops were still A holes.
Post a Comment