
Police position bodycam P.O.V to make suspect look like he was resisting - mkhalil
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHwDGTJ1m8U
======
gherkin0
After seeing too many videos like this, I'm starting to interpret police
shouts of "stop resisting" as an indication that some kind of law enforcement
abuse is happening. Here, it's seems like strong evidence of mes rea _.

_ [http://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/mens-
rea](http://www.crimemuseum.org/crime-library/mens-rea)

~~~
ddingus
I just dropped a big comment here. You are far more likely to be right about
that than not. Sadly.

It's about liability management, and the implications of the "escalation of
force to compliance" doctrine governing so much of our policing today.

------
Kinnard
It is hard to imagine something more egregious . . . short of murders which
have been consistently happening.

The thing is, there hasn't been any uptick in police abuses, we just are now
able to check out collective cognitive bias with video evidence.

Imagine what was going on in the 90s, or the 80s can your mind even take it to
contemplate the 1970s?

~~~
ddingus
This varies by region. In my region, the 70's and 80's were a time of pretty
great policing. "Protect and serve" along with deescalation techniques were
the norm.

In the 90's a new chief changed all of that. It's on a return back, but the
damage done will take a decade or two to undo, if it can all even be undone.

It is generally true that the rise of social media and citizen reporting and
sharing has improved visibility. In many places, this has been going on a long
time. Many people are shamed or harmed to the point where they won't talk
about it.

------
DrScump
A better title wound be "Police reposition bodycam in vain attempt to limit
evidence of police brutality that got one convicted and the rest lost their
badges"

... but that's more than 80 characters.

~~~
_nedR
The key takeaway from the article (at least IMO) is that police bodycams can
be fooled/sabotaged in this manner to hide/alter evidence. Think about the
countless cases out there, where there is no 3rd party footage to corroborate
the story told by the bodycams.

Without the 3rd party CCTV footage to expose this, the suspect would probably
be facing additional penalties for "resisting arrest".

~~~
ddingus
"Interfering with a peace officer" and "resisting arrest" are nearly always
bundled. The two together are hard to defend against in many scenarios, unless
there is a record, or a very strong witness.

The arrest is often structured in a way, such as shouting "stop resisting!"
almost no matter what, to make it difficult for observers to understand what
they are seeing. It's liability management. They lose nothing by doing this
and gain a very serious personal and department risk reduction.

~~~
DrScump
It's frightening to think of the tens of thousands (or more) of suspects
treated in this way in the eras before bodycams. Only the rarest cases (e.g.
Rodney King) were documented in any way.

~~~
ddingus
It is. Most of us had no idea. I know I didn't.

------
ddingus
This "stop resisting" scenario can often be a set piece. I see a few comments
in this thread hinting at that.

I have some direct, personal experience with this. Short story is the police
came to my home over an erroneous domestic violence report. The truth is my
wife and daughter were having one of those moments and did a lot of yelling,
and it sounded bad. Nothing criminal, just a really smart and pissed off 14
year old saying vile things.

I come home, see the mess, send everyone off to their corners in order to
start the cool down so I can help sort it out. Decide maybe I'll take a step
outside and drink my coffee, and there they are. Three very annoyed officers
who very clearly believe I did something.

We had a chat, they wanted in the home, I denied that, and they were not going
to deal with that AT ALL. My reason was adopted foster kids and how that can
play out when cops end up in the home. They worry, as they should. But, I
could not get this explanation in, due to the fact that the police were more
interested in "running their script" than they were policing.

They ended up touching me, saying, "you are under arrest" and at that point, I
completely relaxed. Not to the point where they would have to carry me, just
very obviously non-confrontational. I had no issue with getting cuffed,
questioned, etc... part of a crappy process.

They, however, wanted more. So I got a knee in my back and slammed into the
driveway hard. Really hard, like "jesus, this is happening to me, an ordinary,
geeky, non threatening white guy?" hard. (and I'm not a racist, my son is
black, and I think in these terms having had a lot of experiences with said
son, just saying...)

I remained limp, and they started working me over, clearly intending to teach
me a lesson; namely, they get to do what they want to do, rights or not, due
process or not. There was a witness, which was a good thing, and that witness
is important for this next bit too:

So, there I am, not doing anything. Notably, the moment they assaulted me,
they started shouting, "stop resisting", which was puzzling to me. There never
was any resisting. When I didn't deliver, they grabbed my arms, yanking me
back and forth. To an observer, who didn't know me, this looks a whole lot
like somebody fighting arrest!

Of course, nobody in the family had any idea prior to this mess.

They did the yanking around, then when it was time to cuff me, they tried pain
holds on my hands. Why? Punitive is my guess, because I did nothing, until
those. And the only thing I did was maintain my body position to avoid pain
and damage. (My wife worked as an outreach worker and I had been the training
dummy for these holds and knew them cold, able to avoid them without doing
anything hostile.)

This cycle happened a couple times, and during it, I responded to most of the
"stop resisting" directives with something snarky like, "are you gentlemen
done?", or "make sure you get all the anger out so we can talk like adults",
etc...

Yes, I know. This did not do me any favors, but to be frank, I was so angry,
hurting, and shocked at this game playing out that the snark was coping. I
really didn't want to do anything to lash out, nor anything dangerous, so
snark it was.

Eventually, they wrapped it up. The whole "rag doll" act was maybe a minute?
Two tops?

My brother in law was observing, and they wanted him gone. Thankfully, he
simply observed and did not "take a walk over here to talk", quietly affirming
his intent to comply with their request once the action was over. He made it
clear he was watching, and only watching.

Once it was done, I was in the car, hurt, bleeding from a head slam or two in
response to the snark, looking around in wonder over how what should have been
a rational conversation ended up such a mess!

Well, maybe this isn't so short. Sorry.

Anyway, my wife comes out, they get all their questions answered, but they had
done what they did to me. So, they really couldn't just drop it. I had to go
downtown, and they more or less were obligated to justify doing what they did,
leaving me with a trip to the intake wing of the jail and a quick, very late
night release. (that was not fun either)

Interestingly, she called them on it, basically saying they could drop it, let
me go, and we can just all go our own way, or they will be in court explaining
the whole thing...

So, it's a set piece when they want it to be. And in my case, it was punitive.
I simply didn't comply with an order they gave me, which was to allow entry
into my home. And they wanted me to understand doing that was expensive. No
joke.

When we got the police report copies, it was like bizarro world! When I could,
after walking home late that night, I typed up the whole thing. 11 pages, no
sugar coating, just memory dump to capture all that had happened.

Their report didn't compare at all. It was hard to see it was the same event!
Claims I had a gun. Claims I was using profanity and disparaging them. (the
latter was true, but not even laced with disrespect, more like, "really? you
should be ashamed" at worst, and only while I was being assaulted), and it
went on and on...

Here's the thing: I had a witness and was in good standing with my community.
Coaching kid sports, model adoptive parent, employed, no record, the works.
They had the three of them present, and could write anything they wanted.

And they fabricated all of it, fabricated what onlookers may see, fabricated
their testimony in court, the works. (and that still galls me having to watch
them lie in my trial with impunity)

My attorney explained it this way:

Most people won't fight it. They won't have the money for an attorney, they
will feel deep shame over having to go to work looking like a prize fighter
who lost big, and it's just a hassle all around.

On their end, they work out a quick and dirty process they can use every time.
It's quick, and most importantly, is structured to maximize the pain of others
involved, and minimize their liability. Most of the time, it works great. One
person's word against three fine officers? Who wins?

Exactly.

So I did the trial, and the entire time they were trying to get it moved to
Federal Court (WTF is it with that?), delaying proceedings, making me appear
say 20 times at least, offering bench probation, offering community court, and
raising the ante to be sure I took the max risk with a trial.

95 percent of people fold on all of that. I didn't, and was found not-guilty,
had to file a tort to get my expenses back, and after about 8 months, it was
over. Painful financially, painful physically, and annoying as hell having to
structure work around so many legal entanglements they came up with.

The other thing my attorney explained was the difference between well trained
professionals and thugs.

Pros will use deescalation techniques to manage the scenario down and have
that rational conversation. Most likely result is paperwork and everybody
moves on. The thugs are all about compliance and thuggery.

The thugs are cheap and effective. All they need to do is teach them liability
managed means and methods and set 'em loose as bruisers to keep the peace.

My incident was in the early '00's Today, cell phone cameras, social media,
etc... have changed the game and we are seeing so many more incidents play
out. These incidents have been going on (attorney told me that too), but we
just didn't hear about all that many. Now we do.

The body cams are a direct threat to the thugs. The liability management goes
out the window, and those set piece tricks they use do too. Expect them to
resist this to the maximum degree.

But also expect to have to understand how they got to be thugs! It's the
training and the overall culture and directives they get from their superiors.
It's not OK to just blame the street cops. What they are doing, if they are
doing thuggery, is wrong. Make no mistake. But, they are being TOLD to do
that, and it's that we need to face head on.

In my town, thuggery got started when a new police chief took over. That
person is gone, lots of damage done, and the current chief is doing good, but
a damaged department is a really tough problem. It will take a decade to clean
it up and get the people to trust them to do policing again.

Those costs are huge! And that's what cheap thuggery costs us, IMHO.

I'm fine. So many other people are not. They have records, were damaged
physically, or worse.

Just know there are good policing efforts out there too. They use
deescalation, they train professionals, they pay them, and they have the trust
of the community they protect and serve. They are no longer the norm.

If you ask me, all this recording of events is necessary. There will be a lot
of pain resulting from doing it too, but we need to feel that pain, if we are
to muster the political will to return our police to the "protect and serve"
doctrine, not the "escalation of force to compliance" doctrine doing so much
harm today.

On that last note, "escalation of force to compliance" is the majority
standard in policing today. It means do what you are told, or you will be
punished. It also means not doing what you are told can result in death[1],
and that's BY DESIGN too. Remember that.

Now, perhaps you may see these events in a new light. Why those cops are
corrupting the monitoring tech is driven by more than just their own character
issues. A lot more.

[1]...if that seems over the top, I agree. However, what I put here comes from
my case and a few good, frank and open conversations with an experienced
criminal attorney.

In my case, they presented that doctrine, and it contained levels of force, up
through deadly force, constrained only by compliance. If they don't get their
way, they continue to use more force, until they do, or it's moot. No joke.

~~~
mkhalil
Wow. That's one hell of a story (long one, but it was worth it). Glad to see
you turned out okay, and was fortunate enough to have the financial
capabilities to fight it off. Most people don't. Especially the whole
appear-20-times-in-court, a lot of people (especially lower class working
people), would probably get fired.

When people see prosecutors rack up huge bogus charges that can get you
sentenced to years if not life in prison, they fold.

I agree completely on the body cam issue. I think constant monitoring of
public servants is the best way to move us from them from "escalation of force
to compliance" stage to the "protect and serve".

~~~
ddingus
It was expensive. I had to call all my notes and favors in. One thing that did
help was that document I made the morning after. That was just brain dump,
good, bad, ugly.

When qualifying attorneys, I asked if I did anything wrong. If I did, my
thought was to take the hit and do the community court to limit my
obligations. The attorney I selected said I needed a trial, and she was
pissed.

The discussions we had were worth every penny, and she basically said this
whole mess was going to be "civics 101" and was right. I learned a ton and I
got well informed, "school of hard knocks" style.

We are currently, in most places, nowhere near a policing doctrine we can
believe in. Social norms, our petty "blame those other people" polutics, and
money lie at the roots of this problem.

Thuggery is cheap. Actual policing is more expensive, until externalities are
considered.

In addition to the monitoring, we really do need to find ways for people to
understand the external costs and risks.

Most interestingly, people appear to be driven by their own safety. Makes
sense. Who isn't? However, the reality is counterintuitive, in that thuggery
replacing real policing actually raises our cost and risk exposure, both if
which drive more petty crimes, and can contribute to real crime too.

This problem hurts everyone, including the thugs, who are often capable of
policing, despite their lower overall education and background.

