>>>MOD ALERT<<<Pinellas deputy fired for excessive force in traffic stop

Discussion in 'Law & Justice' started by superbadbrutha, Nov 21, 2016.

  1. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The woman was lucky. Don't comply with a cop and that will usually result in arrest. He went over the top, but the woman was still inconvenienced (and probably bruised) because she didn't "comply". I guess in today's "get hurt, earn money" society she probably thinks it was worth it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The woman appeared to to make a "movement" towards the cop. I can't tell if it made any sort of contact at all. Bottom line is comply and move on. See my comments above. She got a hard time which wasn't necessary. Yes the cop went overboard...
     
  2. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Explain how she "didn't comply."
     
  3. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    She is innocent hence there is no need to comply to a thing.

    The boss of that cop disagrees with you.
     
  4. peoshi

    peoshi New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,105
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I posted links to the sheriffs office and the DA on a public forum and encouraged you to complain about it there but I'm trying to hide it?:blankstare:

    I'm done...now you're not even making sense.
     
  5. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    This day just keeps getting better and better!
     
  6. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Compliance has nothing to do with innocence or guilt. I always comply with a cop when he asks/tells me to do something. It's the easiest way to not have a bad day, and to get on with what you were doing in the fastest time. This woman had a bad day because she didn't comply.

    I saw the video and she appeared to make a move towards him. In fact, in that same move she appeared to snatch something out of his hand.
     
  7. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Nope. You're seeing what you want to see.

    From the sheriff's department report:

    "In order to facilitate the impounding of this vehicle, you instructed the female occupant to
    exit the truck. Upon her exit, you handed her driver's license back to her. As she took the
    license and turned to walk away from you, apparently free to leave, you used unnecessary
    physical force...


    The video evidence does not show the arrestee approaching you aggressively, forcefully
    snatching or removing her driver license from your hand, or making contact with your
    chest at any time.
    "

    She complied with the officer and then was assaulted. It seems as if you're fabricating parts of the story that just didn't happen to fit your preconceived position.
     
  8. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It has everything to do with it. She is innocent, and besides having an ID check, the cop could not do a thing with her / she's free to do whatever. You need to be far more specific what this "compliance" was. Compliance with what? And where did you read that? Because it starts to be obvious you are making this entire thing up.

    The boss of the cop who got fired over this, totally disagrees. Your flawed opinion to protect this obvious crooked cop is totally irrelevant. That cop made up that he was attacked by her. That obviously is not the case. Hence it is a crooked cop. And I guess there are always these "special" people who protect cops even when it's proven that they are crooked.
     
  9. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I disagree, maybe I'm seeing what I want to see, but I disagree with that statement. She snatched it from what I saw in the video.
     
  10. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What? Complying with a request from an officer has to do with innocent or guilt? So if you are innocent of any crime you need to not stop when the cop requests you pull over?
    What the hell are you talking about? Do what a cop asks and be nice. That's compliance. If a cop says get on the ground, best to get on the ground, you don't know what he's thinking. This video exemplifies that.


    lol - PROTECT? What the hell are you talking about? I'm in no way suggesting that the cop was correct, or that he did not deserve to get fired, or that he didn't go over the top. I'm not talking about the cop, I'm talking about the woman. I was saying the woman would have had less bruises and a better day if she didn't appear to have an attitude. That doesn't excuse what the cop did. To me it looked like the woman snatched the ID. The boss of the cop might have more info, and is well within his right to disagree with my opinion on a few seconds of watching a video, I don't particularly care.

    What I am saying is I give an officer as much respect as I can. Keeps most people happy and avoids bruises from the cop - crooked or otherwise deserved.
     
  11. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What request? You're making it up.

    The driver stopped the car. Besides that... the driver is a HE. The person who got attacked by that cop for no reason is a SHE. So exactly what are you talking about?

    That request was made, after the cop slammed the woman into the car, and was holding her by the waist. She complied immediately as far it was possible by being grapped all around your waist. So do tell us all why that woman had to be attacked first? And the only reason he slammed her in the car, was that he came up with the idea that he was being attacked. And that is a lie. The video showed that. The sherrif FIRED him over that bogus claim. End of story.

    You're defneding a crooked cop that pretends to be attacked by that woman in order to beat her up and arrest her. THAT is the reason he got fired. He isn't being fired over the use of force. He got fired because the sherrif looked into it, and judged his police officer was lying that he was being attacked. Get it? I doubt you do.
     
  12. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I think you should watch the video again.

    Besides that, you keep claiming that she "didn't comply." Exactly which order are you claiming that she didn't comply with? Because the Pinellas County Sheriff's Department is saying something completely opposite of what you're saying. They say she was apparently free to leave when he attacked her. Why are they wrong, and you right?
     
  13. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Any request.


    What part of "you" did you not understand in my quote. I am talking about anyone's interaction with police; YOU, the driver in this video, or the passenger. I suggest that if you comply and be nice, you will have "less problems". What part of that seems difficult to comprehend? That doesn't excuse bad behavior, but it will ensure that you have less bruises or time at the station. It applies to real criminals too.


    I was speaking generally. It was an example and not a direct reference to the video (you know, there was the word YOU in the quote again) :roll:


    I'm defending nobody, you're just trying to make it look that way - but failing. I'm saying you (note the word YOU) don't know if you will meet a crooked cop. The cop was fine to get fired, but the woman also looked like she had an attitude, and that contributed to the crooked cop throwing her about. That doesn't excuse the cops behavior, but you (YOU) are gonna avoid trouble with police (especially crooked ones) if you respect the cop, comply and don't give them an attitude. It's not difficult to comprehend, but you somehow assume this means I'm in favor of bad cop behavior. That's not how it works, and you know it.
     
  14. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I'm not saying she didn't comply with a specific order. I'm putting compliance with general behavior.
    If a cop says she is free to leave and then - as an example - flips him off... that cop might just stop her for leaving. In this case, the woman appears (to me) to snatch her ID from the cop. The chief disagrees, and he has the final say - I don't really give a (*)(*)(*)(*) if I'm wrong, I'm just calling what I see in the video, but - as I said above - that doesn't excuse bad behavior from the cop.
     
  15. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You assume there was a request. Lets have that request already.
    The part of the request. What request? When did the cop make it, and what was it?
    Because as far as I know, there was no request directed to her. Hence she is just innocent and free to go. Hence no need to slam her in to the truck.
    I only care about this instance.

    That is not illegal.
    Negative. Cops don't need to be respected. It's not part of the law.

    comply to what? He attacked her out of nowhere.

    It is difficult cause he attacked her out of nowhere, and you pretend there was some mystical non verbal request to be complied to.

    When you demand respect or get your ass whooped by a crooked cop, than indeed you're supportive of crooked cops.
     
  16. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    No I don't.

    And I was speaking about any interaction with cops, as I've already clarified to you.

    You don't have to respect me either if you talk face to face, but disrespect me and you might have a bad time. It's not a matter of it being legal to respect or not, it's a matter of getting on with your day as quickly and easily as possible.

    That may be true, but that's not what I said. I'm saying that I would comply [respect] a cop to make my life a whole lot easier. If I don't, then the cop might hold me back for more checks. He might start getting suspicious and search my car if he believes there is good reason. He might just be an idiot and have anger issues and looking for an excuse to hit me about; if that happened I'm sure the law would come down on him - as in this case - but I don't particularly want any bruises on me just to prove a point.

    You're welcome to not respect a cop if you are stopped, that doesn't mean my advice is wrong.
     
  17. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I agree with supaskip on one point, a lot of cops (most?) will kick your ass for not kissing theirs.
     
  18. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh really?
    You wrote "Don't comply with a cop and that will usually result in arrest."

    You also wrote: "the woman was asking for trouble too. She wasn't innocent, the cop just used excessive force. Excessive suggests that moderate force would have been fine, hence there was cause."

    And now you claim there was no request at all. flip flop flip flop. lol
    The woman was innocent. The cop lied about being attacked.
    The cop is crooked. And you came in here and defended that cop,
    with your she is guilty of "something" and moderate force would be fine.

    Why are you mentioning that, when it has nothing to do with this case.
    You're just flip flopping.

    That will get you thrown in jail with assault and not me.
    You'll be having a bad time and I get to laugh in your face during the trial.

    So the cop can be disrespected longer. Smart choice to waist his own time instead of catching criminals.

    Not without a warrant.
     
  19. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I also wrote "I'm putting compliance with general behavior.".

    That's right, the title of the tread, and the article, was the cop is fired for using excessive force. Not for using unneccesary force.


    I did? Not once did I say the cop was correct in what he was doing, or that the woman deserved the action taken. Oh well, I guess I'm defending the cop. Fair enough.

    I'm only referencing what the article suggests. You could put that down a misleading article. Why is "excessive force" rather than just "force" cited in his firing? Language suggests that it's because some [but not excessive] force would have been acceptable.


    Sure, if that's worth a broken nose, good for you. Personally I would rather not have a broken nose, and not have to deal with attending court. If you prefer to be hurt and having your day messed up, then good for you. My advice stands; if you don't want to have a messed up day, courtesy or respect usually is a win/win. Seems that win for you is having a disrupted day. Meh, I'd think you'd be in the minority there, but each to their own.

    Incidentally, I only said bad time, not "be assaulted".


    It wastes MY time. I, and most people I would guess, have things to do. I couldn't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about his time. You seem to though - you have nothing better to do than waste a cops time at the expense of your own? That explains a lot :D Feel free to dig back through some more of my posts to pull out quotes to waste some more time ;)
     
  20. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The internal investigation report specifically says that the now unemployed officer "used unnecessary physical force." Unnecessary force IS excessive force.
     
  21. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Good, that's much better than the headline :)
     
  22. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You were talking about compliance to a request.
    There was no request. You've made it up.
    I guess you realised this now, hence flip flop flip flop.

    Incorrect.
    He got fired because he made up that he was attacked by that woman.
    That he used too much force is less important. (not my opinion)

    Yes. You wrote "The woman appeared to to make a "movement" towards the cop. I can't tell if it made any sort of contact at all." That is parrotting the made up story of the cop.

    No you're not. The OP clearly states:
    Gualtieri told 10News that the violence Wagner used on Paige Taylor was too much, but insists what happened next was worse &#8211; the deputy claimed she attacked him. / The sheriff said the Wagner then lies to his backup, saying Taylor shoved him and he arrested her for it. &#8220;He demonstrates that Taylor pushed him. That just simply didn't happen,&#8221; Gualtieri said. &#8220;As the video clearly shows, Taylor didn't touch deputy Wagner at all. There's absolutely no room for a deputy sheriff to not tell the truth,&#8221; Gualtieri said.

    Now. Are you going to keep up this act of contradicting the Sheriff who investigated this?

    Yeah well. You end up being the one who is a violent thug with a criminal reckord. And you also end up paying me for that assault and I'll be geting some free money. It probably will hurt your career as well. If you like that scenario, than good for you.

    Negative. It's the cops own free choice to waste his time on me.
     
  23. supaskip

    supaskip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I quite like flip flops actually. They're good around a pool.


    That's not what the headline suggested, hence why I referenced it.

    That's what I saw. The movement was apparently her snatching her ID. Unless she used "the force" to retreive her ID, she would have to move an appendage towards that ID, which was directly in front of the cop. Ergo, she made a movement towards the cop... are you suggesting she used telekinesis to get her ID back?


    The headline clearly states: "Pinellas deputy fired for excessive force in traffic stop"

    If you believe I'm contradicting him by referencing the article headline, then sure, why not.


    lol, as long as you believe your "free" money is worth the damage, then it's a win win. Personally, I don't think it's worth it. I would rather not be damaged and have no "free money". I find it strange you don't agree - as I said, each to their own.


    He's not wasting his time. He's wasting the departments time. Like just now, I'm at work wasting my department's time with you. My time's not being wasted because I have nothing better to do. I would imaging that if I'm being stopped by a cop, I'm going somewhere on my own free time. I would prefer not to waste that by letting the cop keep me back any longer than needed. You obviously don't think you have anything better to be doing. That's fine, it all makes sense.
     
  24. MikeK

    MikeK New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2014
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    This cop was on some supervisory officer's sh!t-list and this was the trigger they were waiting for to nail him.

    Not unusual.
     
  25. Deltaboy

    Deltaboy Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The former officer in this case should do jail time for assault.
     

Share This Page