published Sunday, March 3rd, 2013

Police Beating

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

115
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
AndrewLohr said...

Ha.

March 3, 2013 at 12:18 a.m.
TirnaNOG said...

The only difference here is there was actual video outside police control that proves everything and then some many citizens of the black community have been saying for a number of years now. It's suspect and obvious these two cops and likely others have done this numerous times before and gotten away with it. In fact, if memory recalls one, Cooley I believe, was in the news accused of using excessive force just a short time prior to this tragic incident taking place. And the way their fellow cops stood around, doing nothing to stop it, makes you think they've been witness to this all before and it's become quite the norm for them. The claim is these type cops don't last long on the force. That they either quit or eventually get fired. I'd beg to differ. All the ones i've know received promotions and went on to pollute the rookie cops under their charge.

I appreciate Chief Dodd. Unlike the last two chiefs, chief daddy luv and pretty boy, he seems a really straight up guy and all around honorable chief, who won't tolerate these kinds of excessive use of force and abuses of power.

March 3, 2013 at 1:35 a.m.
fairmon said...

Most police are good and try to do the job right. It only takes a few bad apples to damage all of them. What kind of people do people expect to be attracted by the pay a police officer receives? Most are there because they chose and like the work. Others are there for their ego and their bullying tough guy mentality.

March 3, 2013 at 5:47 a.m.
Reardon said...

Why didn't the idiot just roll over?

He was armed with a knife.

March 3, 2013 at 6:08 a.m.
jjmez said...

Reardon said... Why didn't the idiot just roll over? He was armed with a knife

  1. Why didn't he just roll over, you ask? If you've ever had broken bones, several in fact, you wouldn't make a fool of yourself asking that question.

  2. The beating, the height, wealth and breath of the beating continued long after the cops had taken the knife away.

These are not rare occurances where a cop just up and lose it. Any attempt to make this one look like a one time thing at the hands of these 2 cops only, who should havenever gotten hired in the first place, only guarantee this will happen again and again. The cops will just be more careful next time. That is until they become comfortable and forget. There use to be a discussion forum, not sure if it's still up, where cops using screen names actually bragged about and congratulated one another about this kind brutality.

fairrmon, I disagree. More money doesn't guarantee a better character or a sense of humanity. Cops like this would be just as brutal and savage if they were making millions in salaries.

March 3, 2013 at 7:30 a.m.
Reardon said...

Read the report.

He was armed with a knife.

Watch the video.

He was taken down, in a attempt to cuff and arrest him.

He RESISTED and attempted to RUN.

He CONTINUED to resist arrest. After being CONTINUALLY asked to ROLL OVER.

Look at it from a non-racial point of view for a change.

What are the odds he would have had the sh*t beat out of him if he simply COMPLIED and DID NOT resist ARREST by (a) running, and (b) refusing to roll over and get cuffed?

March 3, 2013 at 7:52 a.m.
jesse said...

I think he's LUCKY they didn't shoot his arz when he came out w/a knife!He could have stuck one of the cops real easy!

March 3, 2013 at 8 a.m.
conservative said...

Good morning Ike!

You were created to know God and to be His friend forever.- Billy Graham

March 3, 2013 at 8:08 a.m.
jjmez said...

jesse said... I think he's LUCKY they didn't shoot his arz when he came out w/a knife!He could have stuck one of the cops real easy!

Why shoot and end all the fun they were having with Tasers, kicks, fists, sticks? As cops, they already knew they had the upper hand. They could still end it after all the fun and shoot Tatum anyway. But there's no fun in that. Plus, they likely took pleasure in viewing their work of masterpiece.

March 3, 2013 at 8:10 a.m.
jjmez said...

Reardon, we've all already watched the video. The Chief Of Police and his team have watched the video. By now, most of the nation and possibly world have watched the video. The chief and his team all have come to the conclusion that these 2 officers actions went far and beyond the norm of what it should take to subdue a suspect, even one that runs or is combative. The 1000000 ? is, how many others have they victimized and brutalized?

Anyone looking at that video and coming to any different conclusion than these two cops were/are out of control is troubling in and of itself.

Your advice is to look at this from a non-racial view (which it would be the same regardless of the persons race from any viewpoint), maybe you remove your rose colored classes and look at this as if these were averagege everday citizens ganging up on an individual and not cops. Because that's what it all looks like in the end: A group of thuggish gangbangers! A pack of wild animals devouring their prey, and the remainder waiting on the sidelines to feast on whatever carcass that's left. .

March 3, 2013 at 8:14 a.m.
fairmon said...

jjmez said...fairrmon, I disagree. More money doesn't guarantee a better character or a sense of humanity. Cops like this would be just as brutal and savage if they were making millions in salaries.

A better screening and hiring process would prevent bad hires. I am talking about more than a small increase. Think in terms of requiring a 2 year associates in criminal justice, phycological testing and a comprehensive police academy training program. The starting comp should be at least $41,000 per year.

March 3, 2013 at 8:17 a.m.
jjmez said...

A better screening and hiring process would prevent bad hires

Not necessarily true, fairmon. You'll find that many cops have been hired because of who they know that is already on the force, or if some relative is already on the force. Even failing a psychological test is no guarantee an indinvidual won't be hired anyway. As it remains left up to the discression of the police dept. to hire or not. Even when red flags and warning signs appear through psychological exams the person is not a good candidate for police work.

March 3, 2013 at 8:29 a.m.
jesse said...

jjmez, while i'm not excusing the conduct of the cops it's fairly obvious you have never been in a situation like this!When you get really scared your reaction, after you get over that' is to get MAD! I think what you see in the video is RAGE!Payback,if you will, for scaring the crap out of the cops!Of course any one who can overreact like that has no business being a cop but you never know till it happens!

BTW: I spent 12 years on the C.P.D. so i have some experience w/this stuff!

March 3, 2013 at 8:40 a.m.
Reardon said...

I repeat:

He was ARMED with a knife.

He RAN AWAY from the cops.

He RESISTED arrest AGAIN. AFTER clearly being given instructions to roll over.

Think about it. The guy who is RESISTING arrest... MULTIPLE times... the cops arguably HAVE NOT had the opportunity to ascertain if this man IS NOT armed with anything else beyond the knife.

A man who RESISTS arrest multiple times and WHO HAS NOT been cleared as to being free of any other weapons... is a RISK to most notably the cops, the surrounding staff, and the general public, as he has showed ALREADY his resistance and contempt for following the directions -- MULTIPLE TIMES -- of law enforcement.

What should the cops have done? Asked the guy who has resisted arrest, carried a knife, MIGHT BE carrying another deadly weapon out of sight BECAUSE HE REFUSES arrest... to sit tight and play nice?

I'm actually glad these two guys got fired. For the community's own safety against an emotional race riot. All we need is another Trayvon Martin case on our hands.

March 3, 2013 at 8:42 a.m.
jjmez said...

jesse, the problem most is these 2 cops weren't likely scared. It was the power, authority, control and the sense that, "Hey! We've done this before and gotten away with it. Let's have a little fun with this one too!"

Rage? Payback? You just sealed and proved the reality that these 2 cops don't deserve the honor of being in uniform. Not even as dogcatchers.

March 3, 2013 at 8:45 a.m.
jjmez said...

Reardon said... I repeat: He was ARMED with a knife.

and I'll repeat the knife had long been taken away or discarded, whatever, even as the brutal beating continued.

March 3, 2013 at 8:47 a.m.
Reardon said...

Last question, jjmez --

Were the cops 100% assured that this man -- who resisted arrest multiple times, included running away, after brandishing a knife -- was completely unarmed and not concealing another weapon?

March 3, 2013 at 8:54 a.m.
jjmez said...

One last answer, Reardon. You'd have to ask the 2 cops that. However, regardless of what they were or weren't sure of the brutal savage beating went beyond the bounds of humanity and what it should take to subdue a suspect.

Oh, yes I have family members, present and retired, in law enforcement who live in various parts of the country and out of the country, including federal. Guess what? They too were sicken by the actions of these two cops after seeing the video. They refuse to even call them cops or members of the profession.

March 3, 2013 at 9:08 a.m.
jesse said...

There is an adage that kinda defines the mind set of SOME cops,not all but some .It goes "It's better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6!" That's might be what's going on here!

March 3, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.
Reardon said...

By all accounts, let's assume the cops ARE NOT SURE. Due to the fact this man RESISTED ARREST multiple times and brandished a weapon and WOULD NOT SUBMIT to lawful apprehension.

Bottom line, the facts clearly revealed SHOW this man beyond a DOUBT has the potential to harm OTHERS and shows the propensity to NOT follow the law, and has NOT submitted himself to apprehension and disarmament.

What SHOULD have they done, jjmez, with a man who does NOT take orders from the cops, RESISTS arrest MULTIPLE times, brandishes a knife, and potentially could be armed with other weapons? Assuming the cops are not 100% sure he's disarmed?

March 3, 2013 at 9:19 a.m.
jjmez said...

Reardon, didn't you say one last question?

Well, I guess I'll have to repeat myself. Regardless of what the cops were or weren't sure of, the fact remains the brutal and savage beating of Tatum went far beyond the bounds of finding out if he did or didn't have something else on him. We did hear him on the video pleading and begging. Using terms like sir and please as the beating continued.

As for as resisting? Maybe you're viewing some other video other than this one, Rear. Because the rest of us see very little to no resisting even as the savage beating continued.

You're wasting your time in attempting to excuse or justify what these two cops did, reardon. This is why most citizens review boards are worthless and just coverups for these type actions. Far too many are made up of people like you. People who automatically make excuses and sympathize with troubling and troubled cops. Too often they're in place to give the appearance of being on the side of the citizen who complains about police brutality.

Now, I really have to go. This is Sunday after all.

March 3, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.
rick1 said...

Readron, I agree with what you are saying. No one knows if he had anyother weapons on his person. As long as he was not complying he posed a threat to the public.

jjmez, why don't you do a ride along with CPD and see what they have to deal with on a daily basis before you start making comments like "the problem most these 2 cops weren't likely scared."

How do you know they wren't scared?

Have you ever been in a situation like this?

From what I have read in your posts it appears you haven't.

Also were you this critical of Christopher Dorner when he was killing innocent people because people burtality is a civil rights issue and you should be concerned about everyone's civil rights not just those who live in thesame community as you.

March 3, 2013 at 9:39 a.m.
jjmez said...

To answer your question rick1, and after this one I really must leave you all:

(1.) They weren't. Trust me!

(2.) I've been in far worse situations than this one. Thank you for asking, though.

(3.) See #2.

(4.) Yes I was, actually. In fact very VERY critical. Were you as critical of Drew Petersen? The cop accused and finally convicted of murdering one of his wives and another who is still missing? After years of fellow higher ups and even coroner likely trying to cover for him, and only after the last wife disappeared and has never been found?

Ride alongs? See the above second post paragraph 2? My family members in law enforcement? I know how things work. How they are suppose to work and when they've terribly failed the citizenry they're suppose to serve and protect.

Really gotta go. You all will just have to continue this discussion amongst yourselves.

March 3, 2013 at 9:49 a.m.
Reardon said...

Clearly anyone reading my dialogue with jjmez can see his lapse of logic when presented with facts, and his inability to answer questions when presented.

For example, he concludes police brutality when he cannot concede that in all likelihood -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- this man would not comply with lawful requests to surrender, not once (which should be enough), but multiple times, even after brandishing a weapon.

Then he concludes that police officers are supposed to serve and protect the community.

Since he refuses to concede a valid point for whatever reason, I ask the rest of you -- if that woman at the front desk was your mother, your wife, your grandmother, your friend -- and the cops let this man be, after resisting arrest multiple times and brandishing a weapon, and NOT submitting to a pat-down, and then he pulls out the concealed pocket pistol holstered to his ankle and shoots this lady dead...

Would you agree this level of force -- as unarguably violent as it was -- was necessary given the odds that this man was potentially capable after all that was witnessed? If not, what should the cops have done, since he refused arrest, attempted to flee, and brandished a knife?

March 3, 2013 at 10:03 a.m.
fairmon said...

A better screening and hiring process would prevent bad hires

jjmez responds with.....

Not necessarily true, fairmon. You'll find that many cops have been hired because of who they know that is already on the force, or if some relative is already on the force. Even failing a psychological test is no guarantee an indinvidual won't be hired anyway. As it remains left up to the discression of the police dept. to hire or not. Even when red flags and warning signs appear through psychological exams the person is not a good candidate for police work.

jjmez...you described the current process and not a better process which would be conducted by an independent firm without the police involved until they interviewed and said yes or no to those selected by the independent firm for them to choose from. No doubt the current nepotism and who you know network is not in the best interest of tax payers. People forget politicians are in the office to spend money, some want more to spend than others and for different interest.

March 3, 2013 at 10:21 a.m.
fairmon said...

It appears there was sufficient police on hand to restrain and cuff at the wrist and ankles, maybe even put in a straight jacket. Taking a break then commence beating with over 200 blows from a billy club is a clue as to whether it was excessive use of force, abuse of authority or brutality.

The message is do what the officer says and you are not likely to get them upset and get the crap beat out of you. It seems if that level of assault is justified then shooting was justified. Getting fired without the bleeding heart city council reversing the decision says the officers were most likely in the wrong. Firing a policeman is similar in difficulty to trying to dismiss a bad school teacher.

March 3, 2013 at 10:43 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Reardon,

"For example, he concludes police brutality when he cannot concede that in all likelihood -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- this man would not comply with lawful requests to surrender, not once (which should be enough), but multiple times, even after brandishing a weapon."

The man was being beaten with a baton. He had multiple fractures in both legs, including a compound fracture. It is very obvious that the man was in survival mode. He wasn't resisting arrest while he was laying on the ground trying to protect himself from the baton blows. The man was no longer a threat at that point; it's not like he could even get up and run. The police officers could have subdued him at any point while the man was on the ground.

*"I ask the rest of you -- if that woman at the front desk was your mother, your wife, your grandmother, your friend -- and the cops let this man be, after resisting arrest multiple times and brandishing a weapon, and NOT submitting to a pat-down, and then he pulls out the concealed pocket pistol holstered to his ankle and shoots this lady dead..."8

Letting the man be was never an option. However, the man didn't have a gun or any other weapon. I think the cops could have come to that conclusion after the 10th or 15th blow to the mans body/legs. The man was scrambling just to protect himself. If he had another weapon, don't you think he would have attempted to use it?

"Would you agree this level of force -- as unarguably violent as it was -- was necessary given the odds that this man was potentially capable after all that was witnessed?"

The level of force was completely unnecessary.

"If not, what should the cops have done, since he refused arrest, attempted to flee, and brandished a knife?"

Stop beating the man and give him an opportunity to comply with your requests. The two officers could have easily subdued the injured, crippled individual.

March 3, 2013 at 11:15 a.m.
justme73 said...

I've read through the comments and its alarming that so many would view this video and applaud the actions of these two officers. Ok some mention that the use of excessive force was warranted because the victim did not comply with order and that he also had a knife. So lets start there. 1. If he had a knife once they were out in that hallway the victims hand are on the ground as he scoots to back up against the wall. 2. He's backing up against the wall......meaning he's on the ground no where to run an the two larger men are standing over him. How is this man still a threat? Once he is cuffed and rolled back over on his back why is it ok for the officer to get on top of him and continue to beat him about the face? If that's not enough to show that this was in excess then please tell me how much of a threat can a man be once he is cuffed and outside sitting......yes sitting in the grass and the officer turns and kicks him in his face? This is a human be it a criminal or a person with a squeaky clean record. He is someone's son, brother, father, uncle, and/or friend. If this was someone that you knew would you still be so harsh? It's easy for you to say such mean things and feel that the person is deserving of such cruel treatment because he has no value to you.....just another bad person in your eyes. I believe this was truly excessive no ifs ands or buts about it. We do have excellent men and women in uniform protecting our streets just not these two nor the other 10 that stood by and witnessed this awful attack and did nothing to stop it.

March 3, 2013 at 11:39 a.m.
Reardon said...

Thanks for the constructive rebuttal, Easy.

Picture yourself in his situation. The cops witnessed this dude pull out a knife. They witnessed this dude RESIST arrest and apprehension. They witnessed this man RUNNING AWAY fleeing arrest.

I'm assuming given all that was mentioned above, the cops did not conduct a pat down and reasonably assure themselves he was not armed and dangerous, beyond the knife.

Point is there was enough evidence to reasonably conclude this man was dangerous to the cops as well as the people around him. He had EVERY opportunity... EVERY opportunity... to submit. From the first instance he was tackled to the ground, to literally dozens of opportunities afterwards.

Remember, the cops were in survival mode themselves. Given they didn't conduct a pat down and conclude he wasn't armed, what's to say this guy, who gave PLENTY of reason to assume he was DANGEROUS and potentially armed, would not pull ANOTHER knife out and fatally stab one of the cops or a witness?

Are you REALLY going to take that chance, given what they witnessed?

March 3, 2013 at 11:47 a.m.
just_wondering said...

easy123...I agree with you. If these two huge swollen-up Thugs in uniform couldn't subdue a guy who was less than half the size of either one of them,they need not be on the force.

reardon...when the cop straddled the guy and rained down heavy blows with both fists and the other cops just stood around for at least 20 blows before one of them forcibly stopped it,that was extremely excessive. When he was cuffed and sitting on the grass, one of these thugs in uniform kicked him in the face and it looked like it knocked him out,was that not excessive?

As a white man I am ashamed that these thugs in uniform are the same race as me. One of the questions I have is why the black policemen who showed up let it continue,and left the room.It looked to me that they went into the other room to make sure that the other prisoners(?) didn't intervene. Not a one of them tried to stop the,in my opinion,felonious assault that was perpetrated by these thugs in uniform. This guy had eight,eight leg fractures. One where the bone was sticking through the skin!! They still made him try to walk outside,on horribly broken legs.I wonder what happened to the guy for the 48 seconds that he was out of camera view before he was dragged by his leg back into camera view. If these "policemen" could drag him back into the building by his legs,they could easily have subdued him and cuffed him.

March 3, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.
justme73 said...

Reardon, they didn't get to pat him down and they may have been in survival mode, but does that mean continue to beat him while he is restrained? Once the cuffs were on he was still being beat.....what makes that right? In cuffs he can't pull out a knife, in cuffs he can't harm them, in cuffs he is no longer a threat so why continue to beat him once he is cuffed? That's what makes this excessive.

March 3, 2013 at 12:05 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Reardon,

"The cops witnessed this dude pull out a knife."

The officer attacked the man before they knew he had a knife.

"After the fight, Emmer tells other officers outside he didn't realize Tatum initially had a knife. Before he knew about the knife, Emmer had already placed Tatum in a choke hold and spun him around."

http://tfponline.com/news/2013/feb/28/officers-used-batons-fists-stun-guns-on/

"They witnessed this dude RESIST arrest and apprehension. They witnessed this man RUNNING AWAY fleeing arrest."

The man was on the ground nearly the entire time.

"Point is there was enough evidence to reasonably conclude this man was dangerous to the cops as well as the people around him."

How dangerous could the man be without a weapon while laying on his backside?

"He had EVERY opportunity... EVERY opportunity... to submit. From the first instance he was tackled to the ground, to literally dozens of opportunities afterwards."

He was under the influence of drugs and being beaten. It's hard to just lay there while someone is hitting you with a blunt object.

"Remember, the cops were in survival mode themselves."

Why would two 200+ pound officers be "in survival mode" against a 160-170 pound man that was laying on the ground?

"Given they didn't conduct a pat down and conclude he wasn't armed"

They disarmed the man almost immediately.

"what's to say this guy, who gave PLENTY of reason to assume he was DANGEROUS and potentially armed, would not pull ANOTHER knife out and fatally stab one of the cops or a witness?"

The cops had him in a headlock initially. They then took the knife from him. Couldn't the officers deduce that he didn't have another weapon considering the fact that he didn't use one? He didn't brandish another weapon. The officers were already in close proximity to the man. Did he even reach for another weapon? How many blows does it take to know the person isn't dangerous anymore? How many leg fractures? The man couldn't even walk. If the officers thought he had a weapon, why didn't they simply unholster their guns?

"Are you REALLY going to take that chance, given what they witnessed?"

Take what chance? To stop beating an individual that is obviously just trying to protect himself? The officers are supposed to be the level-headed ones. They were the aggressors the entire time. They only seem to stop when they got tired. The man didn't have another weapon. The man wasn't a threat while laying on on the ground with broken legs.

March 3, 2013 at 12:07 p.m.
Reardon said...

--

March 3, 2013 at 12:17 p.m.
limric said...

Blockheaded SS cops. A damming video of Rodney King proportions.

Just think, every Chattanooga resident is going to pay for this - Oh yes. The cops may be reprimanded, maybe even fired; but the coming multi-million dollar lawsuit judgment (details of which are being drawn up at this very moment) will not be paid by these two bald headed thugs, their superiors nor the PBA. When the city loses this case – and rest assured they will – the city should (to recoup the monetary losses) after dismissing the two thugs (cause they ain’t gonna get no jail time) seize any and all assets; ie., accounts, cars, houses etc.

Just like what would happen to any other citizen.

Pfftt , who am I kidding. They'll get promotions!

March 3, 2013 at 12:22 p.m.
just_wondering said...

Reardon said...Remember, the cops were in survival mode themselves.

**Were they in "survival mode" when they took a breather to rest up and gather their breath? then they attacked him anew!!!

Were they in survival mode when the one straddled him and made it look like a MMA beatdown with no ref to stop it? I think not!

Were they in survival mode when he was cuffed and sitting on the ground and they kicked him in the face?**

March 3, 2013 at 12:23 p.m.
Reardon said...

Easy --

Did not the man resist arrest and run away, yes or no?

Given the events and how they unfolded, would you say the cops were 100% sure this man -- uncuffed, brandishing a knife, and resisting arrest -- was unarmed, yes or no?

Did the cops conduct -- or even have the opportunity given this man's unyielding resistance -- to a full pat-down and correct procedure to reasonably conclude this man was unarmed, yes or no?

Easy, how many times do you resist arrest -- via not following lawful commands and attempting to flee -- before you are considering a threat to the immediate surrounding area?

Bottom line, again -- given the FACTS of how many times he resisted lawful orders and arrest -- as long as he's UNcuffed and UNrestrained, he is a presumed RISK to EVERYONE in the near vicinity. Again, the cops DID NOT have enough information to determine if this man -- at that time -- was a risk or not, namely because HE CONTINUALLY RESISTED law enforcement!

To the poster above -- I missed the part on the video where the blows came after he was cuffed. If that's true, then it's definitely police brutality and they (the police) should suffer the consequences -- based on what happened AFTER the cuffing.

March 3, 2013 at 12:26 p.m.
justme73 said...

Yes Reardon the beating continued once he was cuffed. Trust me I'm not saying that anyone should flee or not comply when given a direct order, however I am saying that to continue to beat on ANYONE while they are restrained is extremely excessive as well as kicking someone in their face as they sit on the ground in handcuffs awaiting medical attention. It's all on the 11minute 40 some odd seconds video.

March 3, 2013 at 12:34 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Reardon,

"Did not the man resist arrest and run away, yes or no?"

Yes.

"Given the events and how they unfolded, would you say the cops were 100% sure this man -- uncuffed, brandishing a knife, and resisting arrest -- was unarmed, yes or no?"

They weren't, yet they still initiated the whole event WITH A HEADLOCK. It doesn't seem like they were worried about weapons to me. If they had any inclination that he was armed, why didn't they unholster their own weapons?

"Did the cops conduct -- or even have the opportunity given this man's unyielding resistance -- to a full pat-down and correct procedure to reasonably conclude this man was unarmed, yes or no?"

They didn't ask the man to submit to a pat down. They put the man in a headlock almost immediately.

"Easy, how many times do you resist arrest -- via not following lawful commands and attempting to flee -- before you are considering a threat to the immediate surrounding area?"

I've never been arrested, so I wouldn't have any idea. But I would surely try to protect myself if someone was beating me with a blunt object. It would be very difficult to not protect yourself and simply lay there while someone was striking me. Do you see any moment during the beating where they actually gave the man time to comply with their orders?

"Bottom line, again -- given the FACTS of how many times he resisted lawful orders and arrest -- as long as he's UNcuffed and UNrestrained, he is a presumed RISK to EVERYONE in the near vicinity."

False. I don't know what you consider a "threat". But a man laying on his back with multiple fractures in each leg is not a threat to anyone.

"Again, the cops DID NOT have enough information to determine if this man -- at that time -- was a risk or not, namely because HE CONTINUALLY RESISTED law enforcement!"

No, he didn't "continually" resist anything. The man was LAYING ON THE GROUND being beaten with a baton. He was protecting himself. That is very obvious.

March 3, 2013 at 12:50 p.m.
prairie_dog said...

When you are dealing with a person who is not 100% compliant, the danger of being bitten, scratched, or otherwise exposed to body fluids with risk of HIV, hepatitis, and whatever else a low-life can carry in the way of disease is real.

Don't ask the cops to risk a death sentence to put a person under restraint. They deal with the lowest-life scum on Earth every day of their lives, and they have plenty of reasons to be careful.

March 3, 2013 at 12:57 p.m.
hambone said...

Once you put yourself in a position to be in a confrontation with the cops!

Everything that happens after that is YOUR FAULT!

March 3, 2013 at 12:58 p.m.
dude_abides said...

I think when you're the law you gotta bring Hell with you. A lesson needs to be learned here, and a few teeth in the flower pot can have a calming affect in the days following one of these get-togethers. Probably wouldn't have hurt to give a couple of whacks to the woman behind the counter, in case she had a knife or anthrax or something. Not much has been said about the crew of cops going through doors and looking for troublemakers that think they're just onlookers. Technically speaking, "Y'all want some of this?" could mean various things, right?

March 3, 2013 at 12:58 p.m.
jesse said...

No matter what went down before the man was cuffed once he had the cuffs on every thing after that was a felony assault!If that was the case i fail to see how the grand jury could return a NO BILL on these two!

March 3, 2013 at 1:01 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Seriously, though, it's a tough call. Scary out there. Boo!

March 3, 2013 at 1:02 p.m.
alprova said...

A couple of things....

1.) Did Tatum actually brandish the knife at either one of the two officers, or did they simply see it and take it out of his pocket? Given that officer Emmer asks Tatum after the beating was over, "What were you going to do with that knife?," I'm thinking that it was not brandished at either officer. They simply found it on him.

2.) It has been stated that the cops were in survival mode. Given the number of times that Tatum was struck by fists and batons, I dare offer that Tatum was also in survival mode. "Don't kill me like that!!"

Tatum is not a big man. Both of those officers outweighed him by many pounds and were much taller than Tatum is. They could have subdued the man without striking one blow on his body.

Heck...I've seen a 120 pound female officer take on a 300 pound man hopped up on meth, and she was able to cuff him without beating the man.

March 3, 2013 at 1:07 p.m.
jesse said...

You are talking from where the sun don't shine Al!!

I have a friend who is maybe 5'7" 160 lbs. that could prob. take down any 2 cops on the force!Unless they knew who he was in which case they would prob."politely" ask him the "please" get in the squad car!You might have heard of him! Randy Webb!If not "google" him!

March 3, 2013 at 1:17 p.m.
dude_abides said...

alprova said... "Heck...I've seen a 120 pound female officer take on a 300 pound man hopped up on meth, and she was able to cuff him without beating the man."

I have seen the same thing myself, but it seems like there was some spanking involved, as well. I know, ...sorry.

March 3, 2013 at 1:22 p.m.
dude_abides said...

jesse... I know a cop who subdued and arrested two Randy Webbs, and he was on partial disability because of a testical injury suffered during taser training. So... one of us is lying!

March 3, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

I've seen several videos of police subduing criminals where it appeared that the cops were using excessive force but the videos were not necessarily giving an accurate assessment of all the existing conditions and there really was a need for them to be as forceful as they were. With this particular video, however, I don't see how anyone can think that their force was justified in any way. This was as clear-cut as the Rodney King incident - these rogue cops were simply out of control. The guy was obviously subdued but the cops seemed to take it personally that he was defying their direct order to "roll over." The more he refused to comply with their command, the angrier they got. To say that they feared for their lives after they had already cuffed him and beat him to a pulp is nuts. They weren't fearing for their lives, they were just mad as hell. They went from being professional policemen to thuggish gangbangers. It was also clear to these cops that he was out of his mind on whatever drugs and thus would not exactly be rational enough to follow orders. I'm not overly squeamish when it comes to graphic horror movies but I actually had to turn away a couple of times from watching the brutal blows they were inflicting on this guy. Even though he was a thug himself and not exactly deserving of red carpet treatment, he didn't deserve what he was getting. There's something seriously wrong with anybody who tries to justify what these cops did.

March 3, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.
jesse said...

What was i lying about dude? This is all conjecture on both our parts But i would like to know who the 2 Webbs are you are talking about!

March 3, 2013 at 1:35 p.m.
jjmez said...

Reardon said... Bottom line, again -- given the FACTS of how many times he resisted lawful orders and arrest -- as long as he's UNcuffed and UNrestrained, he is a presumed RISK to EVERYONE in the near vicinity. Again, the cops DID NOT have enough information to determine if this man -- at that time -- was a risk or not, namely because HE CONTINUALLY RESISTED law enforcement

No, RearD, bottom line is there was no rhyme or reason for such a savage and severe beating as these cops committed. If you believe they were justified it can be only one in two or three reasons: (1.) You are a cop or former cop whose done this type thing before, and therefore see it as all in the days work of the average street cop on the beat. (2.) You're friends or family of these two cops, and therefore feel honor bound to support them although your heart and soul say differently. Or (3.) You're just as cold hearted, inhumane and callous as these two cops were. Which is it? None of the 3 speaks well of any character, values or integrity on your part.

It's this type of brutality at the hands of authority that triggers violence and violent outbursts any these communities. Especially when there's no real open door policy of reporting such abuses, and the most certain likelihood of retaliation when a citizen does attempt to make a report. Due to this type abuse many have witnessed or experience personally, they are the least likely group to feel safe walking into a building, filled with fellow cops, to file a report against a cop. And their abusers know this too. That along with years and years of insiders helping to cover for them.

March 3, 2013 at 1:41 p.m.
dude_abides said...

My mistake, jesse. One was Randee Webb, Randy's sister. She was more into Japanese origami than martial arts. The other was Rand Webb, an illegitimate son of Ron Paul that taught "Box Kicking" in Chattanooga in the 70's.

March 3, 2013 at 1:48 p.m.
jesse said...

I'm assuming all this was an attempt at humor!

Lead balloon time!

March 3, 2013 at 1:52 p.m.
jjmez said...

The other disturbing issue in all this is, as Amerika is gearing up to place police in schools all across the country, although there's already long been signs of serious trouble where police have already been placed in some schools, especially poor and minority ones. My question is this: How long do any of you think it will take their mission to turn from one of serving and protecting the children to one of an invading/occupying force against Amerika's most vulnerable? It's children? It's not a matter of if or a maybe, but when.

March 3, 2013 at 3:09 p.m.
rick1 said...

We need to be more worried about the Drones our government is putting into the sky.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57572207-38/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/

March 3, 2013 at 3:31 p.m.
jjmez said...

Who do you think will most certainly be controlling and manning those Drones, rick1? Your average, everday traffic cop like the two involved in this beating, not doubt. No longer fun with Tasers, clubs, fists and boots. They'll be able to do it all from a distance from some building and while using a few clicks on a keyboard or joystick.

March 3, 2013 at 3:37 p.m.
alprova said...

Jesse...nice try, but I didn't see Mr. Tatum square off in a kick boxing match with those two officers. In fact I didn't see him attempt to strike either one of them...once.

Did he resist arrest? Yes. No one likes to be arrested. Was he violent with either one of the officers, dictating a violent response from the two of them? I didn't see any evidence of that. He tried to get away.

Tatum's biggest offense was not to comply with Officer Emmer's demands to submit to an arrest. If they would have tackled the man, rolled him over, forced his arms behind his back, and then cuffed him, that would have been justified.

The use of the batons on his body and the repeated beating around his head with fists, was not justified at all. Eight breaks on both of his legs. I saw blood on that floor. There is no justification for that at all.

March 3, 2013 at 3:44 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

You have pestered me about what blasphemy is and I will get to it in my time. You write what you want to write when you want to write it. You need to get it fixed in your mind that I will write what I want to write at the time I chose and not before.

It will most likely be a slow process simply because you don't see what is so plain about blasphemy especially your very egregious comments and so I will have to be elementary in explaining it to you.

March 3, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.
jesse said...

Al, i was more addressing the fact that sometimes you can't go by size alone, actually it's more about how big your "attitude "is!

The entire persona of cops these days ,from the dark uniforms,bloused pants,shaved heads and combat boots seems geared toward intimidation!I guess they fig. if they look scary enough it gives them an edge! That may work until they run up on a "Nub Light"!World renowned police fighter from back in the day!

March 3, 2013 at 4:18 p.m.
dude_abides said...

jesse said... "I'm assuming all this was an attempt at humor! Lead balloon time!"

At least I'm not 'hero worshipping' some has-been local tough guy. Come on, jesse, aren't you a little old for that?

March 3, 2013 at 4:22 p.m.
alprova said...

Right from the get-go the officers were wrong, in that they stated that they wanted to talk to Mr. Tatum, who started to walk away, then Officer

Emmer: "Yes...you're going to talk to me. Put your hands behind your back."

Tatum: "No...I'm not going to talk to you like that."

When he started to walk away, Emmer grabbed the man and put him in a headlock and when Tatum refused to submit to an arrest, the batons came out. They whipped him on the legs, his back, his arms, and his legs again, over and over.

I did not see Tatum attempt once to strike an officer.

If you listen carefully to the video, after he had been arrested, while sitting out there on the lawn, Officer Emmer stated to another officer that at some point in the struggle, he saw the pocket knife fall out of his pocket and it was grabbed by Officer Emmer.

Then he walks over to Tatum and asks him twice, "What were you going to do with that knife?" Then he kicks Tatum as he was squirming in pain.

I don't know Tatum's history. He might have a rap sheet a mile long, but none of that matters. He was being disorderly, which prompted a call to the police.

Officer Emmer told Tatum that he wanted to talk to him. Talking to someone does not usually involve being placed in handcuffs. I can certainly understand why Tatum didn't want that to happen.

But the second that Officer Emmer put the man in a headlock and threw him to the ground, Tatum had every right to fear for his life. Tatum is not blameless, but the whole thing went out of control with Officer Emmer being a bit heavy-handed from the first moment of contact.

It could have been handled a lot different.

March 3, 2013 at 4:23 p.m.
limric said...

No truer words spoken this today…

Alprova’s

“Tatum's biggest offense was not to comply with Officer Emmer's demands to submit to an arrest. If they would have tackled the man, rolled him over, forced his arms behind his back, and then cuffed him, that would have been justified.”

And Hambone’s,

Once you put yourself in a position to be in a confrontation with the cops!

Everything that happens after that is YOUR FAULT!

EXACTLY

March 3, 2013 at 4:33 p.m.
jjmez said...

When he started to walk away, Emmer grabbed the man and put him in a headlock

Which brings to mind another issue. Didn't many police departments ban chokeholds decades ago, after far too man black males were dying during their use? Can't remember if Chattanooga was one of them to ban'em though I remember one male dying from one over in E. Lake after a neck compression and the subject came up about if they were legal or not. Although his death was blamed on a civilian and not the cops involved.

If they're no longer suppose legal to administer that's another mark against the officers.

March 3, 2013 at 4:36 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative, by all means, feel free to post whatever makes you feel superior and more self-righteous. If you're hell-bent on making a complete ass of yourself, go right ahead...

It will be promptly ignored.

March 3, 2013 at 4:36 p.m.
jesse said...

Al, i agree w/everything in your last post!!!( next to last post!!)

March 3, 2013 at 4:37 p.m.
jjmez said...

Once you put yourself in a position to be in a confrontation with the cops! Everything that happens after that is YOUR FAULT!

Unless you're in China, Iran or Russia, then America will praise you for standing up for Democracy, FREEDOM and those cherished values, Americans hold so near, dear and so proudly boast of to people living in those bad, old oppresive countries. {sarcasm}

March 3, 2013 at 4:41 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Yikes! I just watched the video and fully agree with Police Chief Bobby Dodd. These officers do not need to be on the streets. They need to find another occupation. Clearly, they lack the kind of self-discipline needed to be in the field of law enforcement.

March 3, 2013 at 5:24 p.m.
dude_abides said...

“There are always risks in challenging excessive police power, but the risks of not challenging it are more dangerous, even fatal.” ― Hunter S. Thompson, Kingdom of Fear: Loathsome Secrets of a Star-Crossed Child in the Final Days of the American Century

March 3, 2013 at 5:26 p.m.
dude_abides said...

"GoGo PoPo a NoNo." -Captain James Cook, Waimea Bay 1778

March 3, 2013 at 5:40 p.m.
alprova said...

jesse wrote: "Al, i agree w/everything in your last post!!!( next to last post!!)"

I'm pleased that we can see eye to eye on occasion.

Another thing...even if the guy is a former felon, or whatever, I'd like to have a dollar for every time Tatum uttered the words, "please Sir..."

I was an officer in the city I live in, for three years, following the death of my first wife. I quit in 1980 when I realized that my outlook on people in general was souring. Some people make fine law enforcement officers and some don't. I had the wisdom to understand that the job was not for me before I let my emotions boil over.

Cops have a tough job, no question, but everyone deserves to be treated as a fresh case, without prejudice, each and every encounter they have with an officer.

Why Adam Tatum was upset that night at the Salvation Army has not been explained. A fellow inmate was trying to calm him down when Officers Sean Emmer and Adam Cooley arrived on the scene.

If he did brandish his pocket knife at the personnel who were behind locked doors, as the TFP has reported, then he deserved to be arrested.

But nothing on that video gives me any reason to understand the harsh beating that man received in the process of arresting him.

March 3, 2013 at 6:51 p.m.
jjmez said...

You seem to have a very vivid hatred and an unnatural distrust

But why cherry pick, tu_qu when you and others have posted real pure raw hatred and an unnatural distrust of others simply because they don't look like you ?

That's your opinion. Remember, opinions are like aholes. Everybody's got one, and you're entitled to your ahole opinion just like everyone else.

Is this B.S. on your part, to show your familiarity with these people, so as to falsely bolster you arguments?

not really. Was Chief Dood trying to post his familiarity when he showed his disgust for their behavior?

Or are you claiming that only your relatives and maybe you are exceptions to your claims of how bad cops are?

Again, NOPE! They're not, but I'm confident they would never treat another human being, or even an animal for that fact, like Tatum was treated. That much I do know FOR A FACT! but again, your entitled to your ahole opinion just like everyone elese.**

Tray again! And there's nothing unnatural or hateful about the truth. I've watched you and others post real unnatural hatred here about others different from you. So you can't claim the higher ground of nobility and point fingers.

March 3, 2013 at 7:30 p.m.
acerigger said...

Anyone ever hear of "Roid-rage"?

It's fairly common knowledge that there is a problem with the use and abuse of "growth enhancement steroids" within the law enforcement community.This could likely be a factor in this situation but I doubt that will ever be considered,it might cause a breech in the "blue wall".

March 3, 2013 at 10:58 p.m.
bret said...

I've heard lots of justifications for the beating ... "he was resisting arrest" (which he wasn't) .... "he threatened the cops with a knife" (which he didn't) .... "he was high on crack cocaine and acting irrationally" (which he was). Even if all these allegations were true it still wouldn't justify the beating the perp received.

Everyone seems to be afraid to comment on the racial angle for fear of playing the race card, but I'll put it on the table. The CPD has a sordid history of abuse to black folk.

I'm a pasty white boy, but just off the top of my head I can recount a handful of cases where the CPD severely beat, choked to death, or violently shot a black suspect. I can't recall this ever happening to a white boy. Someone please correct me if my memory is failing.

A drunken black guy on Rossville Blvd. gets shot 60 times for standing on his porch with a rifle, but a white cop-killer like Jesse Mathews is still breathing our air.

Marlon Duane Kiser was another white cop-killer who is still alive and didn't get his legs broken when the S.W.A.T. team arrested him.

The Wadie Suttles case is still unresolved.

And yet, a black guy high on crack gets his legs broken and beaten over 200 times with a baton. You tell me if there is a pattern of racism here.

March 4, 2013 at 1 a.m.
TirnaNOG said...

"he was high on crack cocaine and acting irrationally" (which he was).

All your points are great, bret. However, there's actually no proof Tatum was high on crack cocaine. According to his attorney, he was never tested for drugs of any kind, so there's no real proof he was even high or anything, or just angry about something. So the crack cocaine excuse may turn out to be nothing but a cop CYA moment, or observation or suggestion from the staff rather than an actual fact.

acerigger, I've heard that too. Substance abuse, alcoholism and domestic violence can be found quite rampant in L.E.

Some of them do have an unnaturally pumped up appearance and appear always filled with anger and rage over the simplest things. I came across one once, and just looking into his eyes I found quite disturbing. It was like looking into an abyss. A vast nothingness. Totally void and empty of any emotion. As if no one, nothing was inside. Ususally eyes show something; an emotion of some kind. These did not. They looked like Charles Manson eyes.

March 4, 2013 at 1:30 a.m.
alprova said...

Theres nobody out there who can convince me that Adam Tatum could not have been taken into custody without enduring the beating that he did.

The thought that these two former officers are attempting to get their jobs back is appalling.

Remember Kenneth Freeman? He was the officer who shoved the 71 year old WalMart greeter to the ground on January 27, 2009, when asked for his receipt.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ca2_1233195018

Freeman was finally fired on August 12, 2009, following an investigation of two internal investigation complaints.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2009/8/12/156658/City-Police-Fire-Officer-Kenneth-Freeman.aspx

At the very least, the Chattanooga Police Department got this one right the first time.

acerigger, you may well have hit on something that needs to be checked out. Routine and random testing should be performed on all officers, as it has come to light that repetitive use of steroids can cause one to lose control of their temper at times when it is not called for.

jesse, your earlier statement has a great deal of merit too...

"The entire persona of cops these days, from the dark uniforms, bloused pants, shaved heads and combat boots seems geared toward intimidation! I guess they fig. if they look scary enough it gives them an edge!"

It's becoming disturbing to witness videos popping up all over the place, whenever an officer drags an elderly woman out of her car and throws her to the ground. I'm all for protection of an officer, for they do face danger every day of the week, but common sense seems to have taken a back seat to what can only be described as increasing instances of police brutality.

And not enough is being done about it.

March 4, 2013 at 2:10 a.m.
conservative said...

Good morning Ike,

Have faith in God! Take Him at His word!-Dwight L. Moody

March 4, 2013 at 7:27 a.m.
shen said...

With today's advanced technology the average traffic or beat cop will likely eventually go the way of the horse and buggy anyway. Maybe that's a good idea afterall. At least for the public. Far too many dangerous and deadly outcomes are taking place when cop and GQ public cross paths. More so than when GQ public cross paths with criminals.

March 4, 2013 at 8:39 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Acerigger, Alpo....I agree with the steroid use. It is surprising how many cops are into growth enhancement hormones. I was having that conversation at the gym just the other day and a guy I know pointed out two cops that regularly partake. They are always the ones in front of the mirrors with the weights. There is evidence even mild forms of testosterone and hormone boosters that are available across the counter can cause aggression and mood changes.

March 4, 2013 at 8:41 a.m.
dao1980 said...

ha, Connie has lost his noodle for sure, he's posting to people who haven't even posted in this thread.

March 4, 2013 at 9:25 a.m.
Leaf said...

Two points: 1. To those who argue that if the cop isn't 100% sure someone isn't a threat, they are justified in whatever they do. - Does that mean they can shoot someone who looks threatening? Where does that 100% sure thing stop? Why even have tasers?

  1. Someone brought up a very good point about cops in schools. Could they cause more grief than they stop? Would they do more harm than good? People in a position of authority sometimes become abusers. What would it be like growing up in schools where people looked at you with suspicion all the time?

Could they really stop a school shooting? If someone is bent on shooting up a school, wouldn't they ambush the cop first and then have access to the cop's weapon as well?

March 4, 2013 at 10:50 a.m.
jesse said...

Well i finaly broke down and watched the video and the cuffs were put on at about 6:25 ,no blows were thrown after that!The man was resisting ' kicking,clawing and what looked to biting ,or attempting to! He was still struggling when they went out the door!

Looked like just one officer was doing the beating,the other just standing there! Like Hambone said "he brought every bit of this down on hisself! He owns it!

March 4, 2013 at 11:07 a.m.
Leaf said...

jesse, you are just now watching the video after defending the cops? I think you jumped to the wrong conclusion and now you're trying to defend it.

By the way, if they were worried about contracting a disease from the guy, beating him bloody probably wasn't the best idea.

March 4, 2013 at 11:30 a.m.
jesse said...

Leaf, go back and re read my posts!

Nooga ,your right about the kick,that was prob.what got their job!

March 4, 2013 at 11:37 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Jesse said: “Well i finaly broke down and watched the video and the cuffs were put on at about 6:25 ,no blows were thrown after that!”. . . Nooga ,your right about the kick,that was prob.what got their job!

If you noted the "kick" why would you say "no blows" were thrown after he was cuffed?. . . I don't see how anyone could forget the ending of that video - including a grand jury - that shows the suspect collapsing outside the Salvation Army. . . the part where the guy is kicked again by one of the officers as everyone is waiting for someone to bring a stretcher to carry the suspect.

March 4, 2013 at 12:39 p.m.
JayP said...

For those of you commenting on better screening of police officers, let me simply say this, and it is fact:

  1. Any applicant who is selected to attend the Chattanooga Police Academy MUST have a psychological evaluation done by a licensed clinical psychologist. The applicant MUST BE cleared by the psychologist before being hired by the Police Department.

  2. Any applicant that is rejected or not cleared by the clinical psychologist CANNOT be hired by the Chattanooga Police Department, or any other law enforcement agency in the state, per TN POST regulations.

March 4, 2013 at 12:46 p.m.
acerigger said...

JayP, re your 12:46 post, it doesn't instill very much confidence in their psychologist!

Are the cops ever psychologically evaluated after they're hired?

March 4, 2013 at 12:55 p.m.
Leaf said...

I wonder what that psych screening is like?

Psychologist: Are you insane?

Academy applicant: Well, um, no.

Psychologist: OK. Good luck at the academy. Next!

March 4, 2013 at 1:02 p.m.
JayP said...

Any police officer can be referred for additional psych testing after they are hired, at the Chief's discretion. It usually happens after a "use of force" incident, such as a shooting. I will withhold the name of the psychologist used here, but the Dr. has an impeccable track record of weeding out individuals who are not fit for law enforcement duty.

Keep in mind, you are talking about two officers out of a department of 400 + sworn officers.

March 4, 2013 at 1:07 p.m.
JayP said...

Well, Leaf, your sorry attempt at humor failed.

Each applicant is required to take the MMPI test. Today, it is the frequently used clinical testing instrument and is one of the most researched psychological tests in existence. The test is often used in legal cases, including criminal defense and custody disputes. The test has also been used as screening instrument for certain professions, especially high risk jobs.

If the applicant passes the MMPI, the applicant then must meet with the psychologist, one-on-one, for a personal evaluation. These individual meetings are documented by the Dr., and then compared with the MMPI test results.

The psychologist, then must attest under penalty of PERJURY, that the applicant is cleared for admittance into the academy, or cleared for reinstatement to active service.

March 4, 2013 at 1:12 p.m.
Leaf said...

JayP, obviously my sorry attempt at humor failed with you, but perhaps not failed outright. Are you the actual psychologist who administers these tests, or otherwise involved? You seem to know a lot about the process of psych tests for cops.

It may be two out of 400 who are in hot water at the moment, but there were probably a dozen of them milling around at the scene during the beating. I'm not the only one who thinks that there is a systemic problem.

March 4, 2013 at 1:44 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Leaf said: "I wonder what that psych screening is like? Psychologist: Are you insane? Academy applicant: Well, um, no. Psychologist: OK. Good luck at the academy. Next!"

While psychological testing is definitely important, the bottom line is that there are many perfectly healthy people who are simply not suited for law enforcement. Like most other occupations, law enforcement requires some very specific skills - some people have these skills and other people don’t have these skills. In this case, we had two officers who opted to ignore the police department's policies and guidelines.

March 4, 2013 at 1:51 p.m.
JayP said...

Leaf, let's just say I am intimately involved in the process of recruiting, testing, and hiring of applicants for the Chattanooga Police Academy. I do know the actual psychologist involved, and his reputation throughout the state is outstanding.

That being said, one of the other officers on scene should have stepped in at some point. I don't know if I would classify it as a systemic problem. I do know, officers on the street right now are nervous, and are not going to take any armed individual for granted. There have been six police officers murdered nationwide in the last two weeks, and any armed suspect is going to be regarded as a genuine threat.

Rest assured, no matter what the outcome of this lawsuit, the two officers involved will have a very difficult time getting a job with another police department.

March 4, 2013 at 1:52 p.m.
jesse said...

Seems to me some of the reactions on here are somewhat "Pavlovian"!

March 4, 2013 at 2:49 p.m.
Leaf said...

In satire there is truth. Barney Fife was palatable only because he was 120 lbs and kept his bullet in his pocket. The character's personality ran toward being a bullying despot. What if he were a 240 lb steroid abuser with Doc Martins and a Glock?

Perhaps, as mountainlaurel mentioned, the psychological screening currently in use is not enough. We probably all know cops who just want the authority and gun. Is that all that we want our police force to be? Maybe it's time to rethink what the police force should be like. Maybe a personality evaluation should be instituted.

As a society, we glorify and reward bankers and business managers. But the positions that have the most impact on how our society functions - cops, teachers, social workers - get low pay and less respect. Therefore those jobs don't get populated by the best people. That's not to say there aren't a lot of great cops, teachers and social workers out there, but there are definitely some that would not be hired if there were better alternative applicants.

What if we actually paid these people a lot of money, and screened for only the best? I think it would pay great dividends in the long run.

March 4, 2013 at 3:21 p.m.
shen said...

Responding: Any applicant that is rejected or not cleared by the clinical psychologist CANNOT be hired by the Chattanooga Police Department, or any other law enforcement agency in the state, per TN POST regulations.

The above is not an absolute. There are ways around the psychological exam, even when a cop fails one. Sometimes, all it may take is some higher up whispering to the examiner, we really want to hire this one, and the examiner may feel pressured to oblige by changing a negative evaluation.

In most cases the examiner may only suggest an individual is unfit for duty as a police officer. The department usually does have the authority to override the examiner findings.

March 4, 2013 at 3:34 p.m.
timbo said...

Well, what do you know Bennett. You finally got one right. Even a blind hog finds an acorn every once in a while. Is that cop Jim Hammond?

March 4, 2013 at 3:38 p.m.
shen said...

Responding to: "How long do any of you think it will take their mission to turn from one of serving and protecting the children to one of an invading/occupying force against Amerika's most vulnerable? It's children? It's not a matter of if or a maybe, but when"

The above is already taking place in many schools where cops have been roaming the halls for years now. In Mississippi children are being handcuffed and hauled off in police patrol cars, given mugshots for wearing the wrong color socks or shoes to school. There have been cases where students have been arrested in front of classmates, placed in handcuffs and escorted out of the classroom for writing on the desk, using perfume. Children as young as 5 and 6 have been Tasered and arrested for throwing a temper tantrum. And those are only milder troubling situations where kids and cops cross paths.

If this type over the top aggressive type discipline continues I cringe to think what todays American generation of children will be like as future young adults. Just picture an entire young adult generation of passive/aggressive Adam Lanzas or Jared Loughners running loose or having to be heavily medicated just to make it through an average day. Or to keep them from going postal without notice. I'm serious!! That's the monster America hasn't considered it's creating with these harsh, over the top methods of disciplining its young.

Responding to: "Keep in mind, you are talking about two officers out of a department of 400 + sworn officers"

That's really not a consolation. It just makes one wonder how many ticking time bombs on the verge of exploding, have already exploded are within that 400+. Sheesh! I just go a chill up and down my spine thinking to possibilities.

March 4, 2013 at 3:50 p.m.
Leaf said...

I agree with Shen. When you are under scrutiny all the time it makes the innocent feel like criminals. That fosters an "us vs them" attitude and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I think cops in schools is a terrible idea.

March 4, 2013 at 3:59 p.m.
jesse said...

Leaf, what about the obverse of that point of view!

That is' the cop become a person instead of just an authority figure,some one you see and relate to on a personal level on a daily basis!Not all cops are rouge sadists !They in general are just like every body else only they have to deal w/ the lower forms on a daily basis!

March 4, 2013 at 4:16 p.m.
Leaf said...

How many kids would really get to know and relate to the school cop? Especially if the job of that cop is to be suspicious of the children and potentially kill one of them if they pull a gun at school? Especially if the cop knew that he would be the first one a school shooter would target?

Not a situation to engender trust. I suspect they would more easily fall into the roles of inmate and guard. If they want someone to bond with, the school counselor would be more likely.

March 4, 2013 at 5:19 p.m.
TirnaNOG said...

suspicious of the children and potentially kill one of them

It's not just a potentiality, Leaf. A child kiled at school by a cop has already happened. Texas and Florida. At least one of the two had a toy gun, and the other maybe had an air pistol or a BB gun.

Chicago, a teen went into a coma after being Tasered by a cop. I'm not sure if he ever came out of the coma or if he died. These tragedies hit the news briefly then disappear. There are rarely any follow ups by the media, so people tend to forget about them. Much of the world say Americans have a very short attention span.

March 4, 2013 at 6:47 p.m.
JayP said...

shen said... Responding: Any applicant that is rejected or not cleared by the clinical psychologist CANNOT be hired by the Chattanooga Police Department, or any other law enforcement agency in the state, per TN POST regulations.

The above is not an absolute. There are ways around the psychological exam, even when a cop fails one. Sometimes, all it may take is some higher up whispering to the examiner, we really want to hire this one, and the examiner may feel pressured to oblige by changing a negative evaluation.

In most cases the examiner may only suggest an individual is unfit for duty as a police officer. The department usually does have the authority to override the examiner findings.

Dear Shen: ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE. I refer you to TN POST Regulation 1110-020.03.

Full-time Commissioned Law Enforcement Officer Pre-employment Requirements.

(i) Have good moral character as determined by a thorough investigation conducted by the employing agency; and/or the POST Commission; and

(j) Have been certified by a Tennessee Licensed Health Care Provider qualified in the psychiatric or psychological fields as being free from any disorder, as set forth in the current edition of the DSM at the time of the examination, that would, in the professional judgment of the examiner, impair the subject’s ability to perform any essential function of the job.

  1. No waiver will be granted for mental disorders.

A department CANNOT override the findings of the psychologist. End of story.

March 5, 2013 at 3:45 p.m.
shen said...

(j) Have been certified by a Tennessee Licensed Health Care Provider qualified in the psychiatric or psychological fields as being free from any disorder, as set forth in the current edition of the DSM at the time of the examination, that would, in the professional judgment of the examiner, impair the subject’s ability to perform any essential function of the job. No waiver will be granted for mental disorders.

Be honest, JayP. All of that regulations talks means nothing. And who said anything about a waiver? You know as well as anyone, there are ways around any Regulations or rules. Regulations don't necessarily translate to reality. If a department wants to hire an individual, regardless of psychological issues, they can and will be hired. That's a reality all across the country. This must really be bothering you for you to keep coming back to ti.

March 5, 2013 at 8:29 p.m.
JayP said...

Dear Shen:

As i stated earlier, I am involved with the screening and hiring process. You know nothing of it.

If a department were to attempt to override the opinion of a licensed health professional, two things happen:

That law enforcement agency loses their accredidation.

And that licensed health professional runs the risk of being disbarred from the from the health care profession.

You really think that a LE agency and doctor are going to take that kind of risk over the hiring of one or two "buddies"? Think again.

When you spend five years screening and testing applicants for police officer, then get back to me. I know of several applicants for the Chattanooga PD who failed their psychological background, including one who was the son of a very prominent businessman in the city. None of those rejects were ever hired.

END OF STORY.

March 6, 2013 at 4:56 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.