• Connecticut Cop Found Not Guilty in Viral Video Stomping Incident
    16 replies, posted
[video=youtube;vWhhpJVqmxQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWhhpJVqmxQ[/video] [QUOTE]Bridgeport officer Clive Higgins who was charged with violating a man’s civil rights by using unreasonable force during an arrest captured on video has been found not guilty Wednesday, according to the United States Attorney District of Connecticut. Officer Higgins, who has been on suspension since the investigation began, was one of three officers charged from the beating of Orlando Lopez-Soto in 2011 at Beardsley Park. A video showed police officers kicking Lopez-Soto after he was shot with a stun gun following a car chase. Higgins, a Bridgeport police officer since 2002, was facing a conviction sentence up to 10 years in prison. The other two officers, Elson Morales and Joseph Lawlor, pleaded guilty in June to depriving Lopez-Soto of his civil rights. Lopez-Soto is serving five years in prison after pleading guilty to drug and gun charges in 2012.[/QUOTE] [url]http://wtnh.com/2015/01/14/bridgeport-cop-found-not-guilty-in-2011-beating-at-beardsley-park/[/url]
[QUOTE]Lopez-Soto is serving five years in prison after pleading guilty to drug and gun charges in 2012.[/QUOTE] why the fuck does this matter? why does the article report on this? the article should solely be about the fact these cops kicked the shit out of a tazed person, on camera, and got away with it.
[QUOTE=MrBunneh;46960505]why the fuck does this matter? why does the article report on this? the article should solely be about the fact these cops kicked the shit out of a tazed person, on camera, and got away with it.[/QUOTE] Its not exactly "getting away with it" when it went to trial
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46960531]Its not exactly "getting away with it" when it went to trial[/QUOTE] perhaps "getting away with it" is a bad use of terminology, I just meant the whole thing of him not getting punished despite video evidence of them clearly assaulting someone.
[QUOTE=MrBunneh;46960544]perhaps "getting away with it" is a bad use of terminology, I just meant the whole thing of him not getting punished despite video evidence of them clearly assaulting someone.[/QUOTE] The question wasn't if he did the action or not, the question was if it was unreasonable force.
[QUOTE=Saza;46960610]The question wasn't if he did the action or not, the question was if it was unreasonable force.[/QUOTE] and was it not? I see not reason why two cops would need to kick a clearly incapacitated man in the head like they did.
[QUOTE=MrBunneh;46960627]and was it not? I see not reason why two cops would need to kick a clearly incapacitated man in the head like they did.[/QUOTE] I don't know the whole situation, so no, I can't answer that.
well two of the cops plead guilty, i'm guessing those are the ones in the YouTube thumbnail. my question is what did those two receive as punishment.
[QUOTE=TheKingofBees;46960674]well two of the cops plead guilty, i'm guessing those are the ones in the YouTube thumbnail. my question is what did those two receive as punishment.[/QUOTE] From another article i looked up. [url]http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/2-cops-plead-guilty-in-park-stomping-5541511.php[/url] [quote]Under the plea bargain, the officers each face up to a year in prison when they are sentenced Sept. 2. As a condition of the plea they have agreed to resign from the Police Department. They had been on paid administrative duty pending the investigation. Both are eligible to collect pensions from the city. [/quote]
The guy who got him with the taser never kicked him, it was only the other two officers. Those two officers plead guilty and as a result, face jail time AND lose their shields never being cops again. So technically, justice has been served properly in this case. Anyone who thinks the remaining officer should be in trouble, is wanting so out of vengeance, not justice.
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;46960784]The guy who got him with the taser never kicked him, it was only the other two officers. Those two officers plead guilty and as a result, face jail time AND lose their shields never being cops again. So technically, justice has been served properly in this case. Anyone who thinks the remaining officer should be in trouble, is wanting so out of vengeance, not justice.[/QUOTE] ah, I am very, very mistaken. I'd say rate me bad reading, but that doesn't exist anymore. my bad guys.
The title is way too misleading and just screams "Come hate cops"
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;46960784]The guy who got him with the taser never kicked him, it was only the other two officers. Those two officers plead guilty and as a result, face jail time AND lose their shields never being cops again. So technically, justice has been served properly in this case. Anyone who thinks the remaining officer should be in trouble, is wanting so out of vengeance, not justice.[/QUOTE] I was under impression that the officer who arrived in the car was the officer in question, but regardless, when watching the video again you can clearly see the first man who arrived (who tased him) delivers one or 2 kicks to the head
[QUOTE=MrBunneh;46960505]why the fuck does this matter? why does the article report on this? the article should solely be about the fact these cops kicked the shit out of a tazed person, on camera, and got away with it.[/QUOTE] It's not really irrelevant. You can make an argument about whether it's any good to report the name of accused criminals, but when they're convicted it's kinda fair to report their name in a relevant article.
Wait, did that other article someone posted say they still get to keep their pensions despite being kicked off the force?
[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;46963001]Wait, did that other article someone posted say they still get to keep their pensions despite being kicked off the force?[/QUOTE] As part of their plea bargain, yes.
[QUOTE=cody8295;46960881]I was under impression that the officer who arrived in the car was the officer in question, but regardless, when watching the video again you can clearly see the first man who arrived (who tased him) delivers one or 2 kicks to the head[/QUOTE] It looks like the first guy gives him a couple of soft kicks, the big guy on top of him stomps on him a lot, then the black cop who shows up after kicks him for no reason. The big guy and the third cop are the 'bad' ones imo, one for being excessive and the other for being unnecessary. I can see how the first one might make a case for it not being unreasonable, since it was at the beginning maybe to bring the guy in line, and didn't go on and on.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.