Vancouver police officer charged with assault on cyclist

[Northendzone]

the suspect, or perp, if you will, had very shifty eyes (look at frames 132 to 135) - he looked like he was going to cause trouble, the cop sensed it, and shut him down.

Put the video of America's Funniest Police Punches to the Head. the cyclist likely was in the middle of the riots a few years ago - consider the score even.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Shaggin Wagon

The guy ran a red light IIRC. If he had dealt with the police with respect he might have gotten off with a warning. He escalated it to a ticket and then an arrest and then a punch.

The punch didn't look like it would even leave a bruise. Police do not want to charge one of there own but with evidence like this they have to.

I'm not saying the cop was in the right, just it think that is the basic reasoning for the series of events.

And your basis for that chain of events is what?

[Shaggin Wagon]

Originally Posted by valo403

And your basis for that chain of events is what?

Pure speculation.

But if he was getting put in handcuffs for running a red light I assumed he refused the ticket. Shouldn't that just be a simple ticket for that offence?

[sa226]

It was just an all out strange thing to do. I know nothing of policing, but if you have a squirming or resisting person, don't you use body position to attempt to restrain them?

This guy was just twisting his arm, not even squirming or trying to get away and the guy clocked him across the chin.

The officer didn't even seem agitated. He was assertive, but fairly calm.

Weird.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Shaggin Wagon

Pure speculation.

But if he was getting put in handcuffs for running a red light I assumed he refused the ticket. Shouldn't that just be a simple ticket for that offence?

You would think, but you'd also think that a right hook to the jaw wouldn't be a go to response. I doubt the guy was polite, and may well have been uncooperative, but the whole 'he should've just been polite and he wouldn't have had that happen to him' is really just victim blaming.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Wait are you saying the fact picture presented by the video is incomplete?

So first you thanked this post^^^^^^, which was a sarcastic shot at people who blame police without all the facts. Then you went on to blame the victim without all the facts....

Originally Posted by Shaggin Wagon

The guy ran a red light IIRC. If he had dealt with the police with respect he might have gotten off with a warning. He escalated it to a ticket and then an arrest and then a punch.

The punch didn't look like it would even leave a bruise. Police do not want to charge one of there own but with evidence like this they have to.

I'm not saying the cop was in the right, just it think that is the basic reasoning for the series of events.

[Shaggin Wagon]

Originally Posted by flameswin

So first you thanked this post^^^^^^, which was a sarcastic shot at people who blame police without all the facts. Then you went on to blame the victim without all the facts....

Takes two to tango

I was just thinking about being in the cops shoes. If I was in the victims shoes I would have put my arms behind my back. I know that comes across as victim blaming. I see that is how my statements look. Cop got charged. I think that is good. I speculated the victim may have escalated the situation sorry if it came across that I was stating facts.

Other side: cop was having a bad day. Felt the cyclist was being lippy when he was trying to co-operate. The victim pulled his arm away due to over zealous cop bending it in a way the shoulder is not supposed to move. The cop freaked out and assaulted the victim. Once the officer realized he was on camera, he tried to come across as professional and asked videography to pleas remain on the sidewalk.

This is also speculation as I was not at the scene.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Shaggin Wagon

Takes two to tango

I was just thinking about being in the cops shoes. If I was in the victims shoes I would have put my arms behind my back. I know that comes across as victim blaming. I see that is how my statements look. Cop got charged. I think that is good. I speculated the victim may have escalated the situation sorry if it came across that I was stating facts.

Other side: cop was having a bad day. Felt the cyclist was being lippy when he was trying to co-operate. The victim pulled his arm away due to over zealous cop bending it in a way the shoulder is not supposed to move. The cop freaked out and assaulted the victim. Once the officer realized he was on camera, he tried to come across as professional and asked videography to pleas remain on the sidewalk.

This is also speculation as I was not at the scene.

If that cop is going to punch someone in the face every time someone gets lippy or he's having a bad day he should really find a different line of work.

[Shaggin Wagon]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

If that cop is going to punch someone in the face every time someone gets lippy or he's having a bad day he should really find a different line of work.

Agreed

[Flash Walken]

If she didn't want to get raped, she shouldn't have worn a short skirt.

If he didn't want to get tossed in the Gulag, he shouldn't have forgotten his papers.

If he didn't want to get punched in the face by a cop, he should've been submissive and obedient and not questioned their ultimate authority.

The reason no one can figure out why he was being arrested for running a red light? Because there was no reason to arrest someone running a red light on a bicycle. Pure power trip.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The reason no one can figure out why he was being arrested for running a red light? Because there was no reason to arrest someone running a red light on a bicycle. Pure power trip.

There are a lot of facts missing from the video.

Is a bicycle considered a vehicle when on the road? Is that bicycle bound by the rules of the road? Is the cyclist bound by the expectations placed on the operator of a vehicle?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

There are a lot of facts missing from the video.

Is a bicycle considered a vehicle when on the road? Is that bicycle bound by the rules of the road? Is the cyclist bound by the expectations placed on the operator of a vehicle?

Here's a scenario:

You're at your job. You screw something up, big time. Your boss comes up to you and says, "Boy, you really screwed that up. How'd that happen?"

Now, say for example, you did everything you were supposed to do, followed the directions on the packaging exactly as it says.

Do you A) Take all the blame, knowing it will cost you your job, even though you personally were just following the directions set out by your bosses?

Or

B) You simply say you were following the directions and that something must be wrong with the directions.

In this scenario, their bosses and their union haven't been able to come up with a single legitimate reason for the officer in question's behaviour, which is why he's being fed to the wolves on this one.

Yes, we don't have all the facts and never will, but, that doesn't change there wasn't and hasn't been a single significant reason given for the officers in question to behave the way they did except for that tired old 'resisting arrest' blanket defense which was proved false (a lie...) by the video.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Here's a scenario:

You're at your job. You screw something up, big time. Your boss comes up to you and says, "Boy, you really screwed that up. How'd that happen?"

Now, say for example, you did everything you were supposed to do, followed the directions on the packaging exactly as it says.

Do you A) Take all the blame, knowing it will cost you your job, even though you personally were just following the directions set out by your bosses?

Or

B) You simply say you were following the directions and that something must be wrong with the directions.

In this scenario, their bosses and their union haven't been able to come up with a single legitimate reason for the officer in question's behaviour, which is why he's being fed to the wolves on this one.

Yes, we don't have all the facts and never will, but, that doesn't change there wasn't and hasn't been a single significant reason given for the officers in question to behave the way they did except for that tired old 'resisting arrest' blanket defense which was proved false (a lie...) by the video.

Uhmm, well wow thanks for that, I guess.....It really doesn't address any of the questions in my post.

For the record, and I have said this in other treads like this, if the office is found to have act incorrectly, after an investigation is completed by those more knowledgeable in the facts and application of policing protocols, then he should face the appropriate punishment.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

except for that tired old 'resisting arrest' blanket defense which was proved false (a lie...) by the video.

I'd like to be clear that I definitely don't believe anything the man did warranted a punch to the face at all, but the video clearly shows the man pulling his arm away while they are trying to handcuff him. I'm sure many many otherwise cooperative people would do something similar in a situation like that and I would hope the officers would have handled themselves better (which in this case seems like communication more than anything would have been the best approach) but by resisting the handcuffs that's pretty much technically resisting arrest and does allow the officers to use necessary force. Key word is necessary.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Uhmm, well wow thanks for that, I guess.....It really doesn't address any of the questions in my post.

For the record, and I have said this in other treads like this, if the office is found to have act incorrectly, after an investigation is completed by those more knowledgeable in the facts and application of policing protocols, then he should face the appropriate punishment.

Failing to stop at a red light with an intersection on a bicycle is a $168 fine.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Failing to stop at a red light with an intersection on a bicycle is a $168 fine.

Is the fine the same for a motorbike/car/truck?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Failing to stop at a red light with an intersection on a bicycle is a $168 fine.

And? The video leaves plenty out, there are certainly ways that something that starts off as a ticket turns into an arrest. That doesn't make a punch like that okay, but the arrest could well have been warranted.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by valo403

And? The video leaves plenty out, there are certainly ways that something that starts off as a ticket turns into an arrest. That doesn't make a punch like that okay, but the arrest could well have been warranted.

Like if he was drunk?

Like if he had a warrant for his arrest?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Is the fine the same for a motorbike/car/truck?

Yes, as far as I am aware, in BC Bicycles fall under the same regulations as motor vehicles (and then some) when using public roadways.

valo: Almost certainly other things had transpired prior. You would think though, if they were legitimate reasons, that much of this would have been avoided by now. Another police force investigated the incident, and felt charges were necessary. Do we second guess the police laying charges this often?

The defense of the cop being charged is that the guy on the bicycle was being arrested for running a red light without a helmet on his bike. We don't really have to look too deeply into what else might have happened considering we have an explanation for why he was being arrested.

Now that we know that running a red light is usually a $168 dollar fine and riding a bike without a helmet is not illegal unless you're on a highway, we can say with some amount of legitimacy that the entire arrest and assault is likely unnecessary.

I'm sure more info will come out in the wash, but, the two cops making the arrest must have pretty significant lags in memory if the best they can come up with was the guy went through a red light.

Has anyone here ever been arrested for running a red?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Yes, as far as I am aware, in BC Bicycles fall under the same regulations as motor vehicles (and then some) when using public roadways.

valo: Almost certainly other things had transpired prior. You would think though, if they were legitimate reasons, that much of this would have been avoided by now. Another police force investigated the incident, and felt charges were necessary. Do we second guess the police laying charges this often?

The defense of the cop being charged is that the guy on the bicycle was being arrested for running a red light without a helmet on his bike. We don't really have to look too deeply into what else might have happened considering we have an explanation for why he was being arrested.

Now that we know that running a red light is usually a $168 dollar fine and riding a bike without a helmet is not illegal unless you're on a highway, we can say with some amount of legitimacy that the entire arrest and assault is likely unnecessary.

I'm sure more info will come out in the wash, but, the two cops making the arrest must have pretty significant lags in memory if the best they can come up with was the guy went through a red light.

Has anyone here ever been arrested for running a red?

No, because he's being charged with assault, not false arrest.