https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/06/us/buffalo-police-officers-plead-not-guilty-old-man/index.html

I don't really get the potent outrage over this incident. The man walked towards the officers as they were clearly part of a formation moving people out. They pushed him, but not particularly hard. Unfortunately he fell straight back and got injured. Discipline seems appropriate for these officers maybe, but assault charges are extreme.

I wonder if part of the thinking is to overcharge in some of these cases in the heated moment of protests to avoid political consequences, knowing that they'll never get convictions. If so, that's not good. But overcharging happens all the time to civilians, so I'm not that sympathetic that it's finally happening to people with authority.

This post was edited by IceMage on Jun 6 2020 08:02pm

It's about using the appropriate force for the situation. The appropriate force for that situation was basically none. They don't get a pass for violence because they were "in formation". At least, if they felt justified, they should have restrained him, not pushed him. Old people being a fall risk isn't exactly privileged information. And then even if they did try to restrain him, it doesn't exactly take a lot of force to restrain an unarmed 75 year old man.

Causes of death for Black Pepol by order of magnitude:
1)Constipation
2)Drowning in a bathtub
3)Drowning in a swimming pool
4)Falling from bed
5)Extreme weather
6)Shot by police while unarmed

The guy was an activist out there to protest, violating curfew and covid orders to go face off against police in an angry mob that was frequently boiling over into minor low level violent unrest like throwing bottles or fireworks. The officers had the job and specific orders of holding a line and pushing ahead when given the signal, pushing back anyone who won't retreat on their own. They were doing the exact same thing as tens of thousands of cops and national guard and state troopers around the country right now, standing in a line and rebuffing rioters. And this guy walked up to them, they pushed him back, he tripped and fell and hit his head because he's a 75 year old man with poor balance. It doesn't look like they used any more force than they use on everyone else, and they immediately got a medic to him while holding their line.

If I had to make a takeaway from this, assault charges would on the complete wrong end. If anything, this should be used for police to say that having elderly, sick, unfirm or underage people at these riots is inherently dangerous and they should be targeted for immediate detention and arrest for their own safety. If a mother brings a baby or young kids, or an old man is out there and they walk up to the police line, they should just be arrested and booked for breaking curfew / covid / breaching the peace / whatever. The state has a compelling interest in keeping them safe from their own poor decision to participate in a dangerous riot. They can't arrest everyone which is why they can't just go kettling tens of thousands of people and booking them one by one, but they can target and arrest vulnerable people.

The assault charges though, are just more proof of how liberal cities knowingly corrupting their criminal justice system to appease a mob.
The politicians know the cops did nothing wrong, the prosecutors know the cops did nothing wrong, the judge will know they did nothing wrong, and most Americans would agree they did nothing wrong. But as long as a subset of the population is threatening to torch businesses and shoot police officers if pilate won't give them the lashing, the government from top to bottom will rationalize its own corruption.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Jun 6 2020 10:23pm

I wholeheartedly reject this justification. It's akin to the "just following orders" defense.

Causes of death for EndlessSky, in no particular order:
1. Stupid.
2. Stupid.
3. Stupid.
....

Ad infinitum. Evolution frowns on you.

This is a fun game, indeed!

when those orders are valid, rational and ethical, then "just following orders" has no meaning beyond false pejorative connotations.
Someone who is following reasonable lawful orders to restore the peace during a riot should not be subject to assault charges because of the missteps of an instigator

Lol

Are you on the side of the looters?



The left has failed to respond to reason. They will only answer to pain or starvation.

This post was edited by EndlessSky on Jun 6 2020 10:37pm

How they follow orders matters just as much as the content of orders. The fact that they were following orders has nothing to do with the violations they make while they carry out the order. "March forward" doesn't mean they can do whatever they want to citizens that stop them from marching forward. They don't suddenly become immune to legal consequence because they were given a lawful order.

This is why police training matters and it's an absolutely perfect demonstration as to why the current training is inadequate. If the police cannot follow a simple order like "march forward" without assaulting and seriously injuring an unarmed 75 year old man, then they are not fit to be police.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 6 2020 10:39pm

And yet their orders were pretty clearly to march forward and push back any protesters who run up to their line, as is completely normal in riot suppression. It doesn't mean they can pull out an AK47 and spray bullets, but using their shields/batons to push anyone in their path is exactly what they're supposed to be doing, with good and ethical reason. Like all less-lethal force, it still carries risks. Someone lost an eye to a rubber bullet, people got their hands burned trying to pick up gas canisters. Who's fault is it that the "unarmed 75 year old man" got injured? He was out at a riot breaking multiple laws and was trying to face off against police who had issued warnings and made it clear they were going to sweep people out of the street. The police used the same standard procedure all other riot cops use.
One party in this story was clearly breaking the law, the other party was doing their job.