Seattle Cop Charged With Assault for Allegedly Punching Man During Unlawful Arrest

Comments

1

Can we just make it a rule whereby if a cop arrests someone illegally, they don't get protections as a police officer, and just get charged with kidnapping? These cops have the right to shoot people, IMO that means they need to be held to a higher standard of conduct, not a lower one. Let's find out who wants to serve their community and who wants to vent their Napoleon complex.

2

And if it were not caught on camera, this cop would be out assaulting other people he didn't like or felt 'disrespected' him.

Fundamental changes to vetting police candidates needs to happen. Most of these guys tend to be angry, racist, rage monsters looking to get off on hurting someone. And they have one of the highest rates of domestic abuse problems of any job in America.

3

@1: Citizens can make arrests as well, so under that scenario defense attorneys for kidnappers might see if they could get their clients charged with an unlawful citizens arrest instead which would look better on their records.

4

Bad cops got to go, not get "reassigned."

5

Sousveillance at its finest.

6

@3 i'd love to run a citizens arrest on a cop. And tell em to "Stop Resisting"

7

Seems like misdemeanor assault isn't nearly enough. It's a different crime when you commit it under color of authority, in the name of the City, with all of the power and threat that conveys -- and then embellish and lie about it. Why isn't there fraud to go along with it, for that aspect? And the base charge should be felony assault, not misdemeanor.

8

Lying in a police report should get you shitcanned, period. If I lied to cover my ass at my job I'd get fired, and I'm not even punching or shooting members of the public.

10

"Harris’ chain of command filed a complaint over the alleged assault with the Office of Police Accountability..."
Ok.
"... which investigates misconduct accusations against Seattle police officers."
Mm hmm.
"OPA forwarded the case to Seattle detectives to investigate the matter."
Huh?

11

@9 i think you are soft peddling the difference between "reasonableness" and "probably cause".

@10 who else is going to investigate?

13

@12:

In that case, one would expect to see some correlation between the permissiveness of the legal standard and the number of prosecutions for not meeting it, namely, the less permissive the standard, the more prosecutions for violating it. And yet, when it comes to LEO's killing innocent, unarmed civilians, it's exactly the opposite.

15

I'll be impressed when the charge turns to a conviction

16

15 days in jail? What the fuck?

19

@17

" He also wrote that Ensley had previously been trespassed from the church."
This could have been immediately checked for corroboration with a phone call. It's the only criminal basis for removing someone from the property and the main reason why he would have been arrested.

I'm not sure if you want to defend the abusers or if you've somehow rationalized these litanies to be objective and without context. But you're defending the abusers regardless.

20

@8
Exactly, and at the very least. "Brady" officers, as they're known, are useless testifying at trial, as a known liar. Add to that they can never be trusted not to lie on a future report, and you have a situation that is intolerable. But it happens anyway. He needs to be fired, and then prosecuted for the lying under oath also. But unfortunately, he probably won't even be convicted of the assault, not in Trump's America.

21

@17: That was a lot of words to defend a system where someone sits in jail for over two weeks on a misdemeanor charge.