In Texas, a 7 year old dropping litter is a bigger crime than choking a child

[Ogier le Danois]

So what are we arguing about here then? The officer's actions were fine, but his language was inappropriate?

The only two comments I could understand were "Why don't you teach your kid not to litter?" and "Why not?" in response to her statement that the guy can't put his hands on her child. There's not really anything in either of those comments that should make national news.

I think a more likely scenario is that the kid litters. The white guy confronts the kid about the littering. The kid shoots his mouth off to the adult. Adult gets pissed off and some kind of physical altercation ensued. Whether the adult or the kid started it would be up for debate.

If the kid started the confrontation (because a lot of kids today don't respect adults and think adults can't physically put their hands on kids), and the adult used a minimal amount of force to defend himself then he is not the suspect in a crime.


Or.... did the adult just up and choke a kid for littering on the street?

Which scenario is more likely? There are parts to the story that are missing and are extremely relevant to the case.

Also, people claim they were choked pretty frequently when it's not true. Pretty much any time someone makes physical contact with another person's upper chest or neck, they think they were "choked".

Let the facts roll in....

Would you consider the moment the daughter blocks the officer from mom to be the catalyst to arrest?

 

[Yakoo752]

So what are we arguing about here then? The officer's actions were fine, but his language was inappropriate?

The only two comments I could understand were "Why don't you teach your kid not to litter?" and "Why not?" in response to her statement that the guy can't put his hands on her child. There's not really anything in either of those comments that should make national news.

I think a more likely scenario is that the kid litters. The white guy confronts the kid about the littering. The kid shoots his mouth off to the adult. Adult gets pissed off and some kind of physical altercation ensued. Whether the adult or the kid started it would be up for debate.

If the kid started the confrontation (because a lot of kids today don't respect adults and think adults can't physically put their hands on kids), and the adult used a minimal amount of force to defend himself then he is not the suspect in a crime.


Or.... did the adult just up and choke a kid for littering on the street?

Which scenario is more likely? There are parts to the story that are missing and are extremely relevant to the case.

Also, people claim they were choked pretty frequently when it's not true. Pretty much any time someone makes physical contact with another person's upper chest or neck, they think they were "choked".

Let the facts roll in....

Are the officers comments condescending or not? Does this add unnecessary tension or elevate the scenario? Did the officer explain why she was under arrest or not?

Do you think an officer has complete immunity with his words?

Is there an instance in which in your eyes it's acceptable to physically touch a 7 year old, that you are not the parent of, in order to discipline... as a non-officer? Can you describe a scenario in which a 7 year old mouths off to a non authoritative adult male and it's acceptable to go "hands on"?

I could not care less about it's news potential.

 

[Shaggy]

Would you consider the moment the daughter blocks the officer from mom to be the catalyst to arrest?

Hard to say what was in the officer's mind at the time.

 

[Yakoo752]

Hard to say what was in the officer's mind at the time.

I know nothing but I'm going to provide scenarios using my professional opine to create acceptance.

I know this is a jackass statement. We're both providing opine with less information then available. I'm just asking questions. You're trying to provide plausibility imho

 

[Sharky]

Sure looks that way on the surface. Maybe it is that way.

But here's a shocker. People lie. Like all the time. What we don't know is what may have taken place before the video. We also don't know if the officer has prior knowledge and history dealing with the family in question.

I'm sure there are plenty of times where one could take a video of part of an interaction I was involved in handling, without any of the knowledge I already had, or without seeing what had already transpired, and it might appear like the issue wasn't being investigated, or the situation was being mishandled.

My first thought was why would the cop ask that? Knowing these things don't happen in a vacuum, you gotta figure there's more to the situation. Maybe not, maybe he a a racist dick. I dunno, but I ask questions for a living and just because the question, in isolation, seems nonsensical doesn't mean it is. Course sometimes I ask people bullshit questions because I think they are liars.

Big shoulder shrug from me.

 

[Shaggy]

Are the officers comments condescending or not?

A little, but not overly condescending.

Does this add unnecessary tension or elevate the scenario?

It might have, but I'd also bet it didn't make a difference. I've dealt with people enough to recognize when the contact starts going a different direction than they want, there's nothing you can say or do to avoid confrontation.

Did the officer explain why she was under arrest or not?

He might have. Remember the video is edited and there's also a ton of hooting and hollering going on while he's trying to arrest them.

I can't speak for Texas law, but in California you're not required to tell someone the reason for arrest BEFORE arresting them.

Do you think an officer has complete immunity with his words?

Absolutely not.

Is there an instance in which in your eyes it's acceptable to physically touch a 7 year old, that you are not the parent of, in order to discipline... as a non-officer?

Putting hands on to discipline isn't the same as putting hands on to defend yourself. Discipline is a form of punishment for a past action. That should be a parent's decision.

Defending yourself from an ongoing action is a totally different situation, and based on the evidence in the video neither of us can know which actually occurred.

I could not care less about it's new potential.

Huh?

 

[Yakoo752]

I don't know what happened. I just know what I reviewed.

Outside of his comments and lack of informing her of why she was arrested I see nothing inherently wrong with it. I'm not saying nothing illegal or nothing outside of the realm of legal. Just nothing inherently wrong

The rest is all "unknown" and yes. We should wait to pass judgement on either side
I don't pass judgement either way. I'm aware it could be all lies but I'm also of the beliefs that cops lie all the time as much if not more then the "bad guys"

 

[Yakoo752]

Can you explain why a report was never taken regarding the original accusation?

Of the choking of a 7 year old boy?

Can you explain why both of the daughters were placed under arrest?

 

[Yakoo752]

I just struggle. I know who my customers are both internal and external and whether I like it or not they both impact my career. I have to deal with very abrasive people re my external customers and have to enact change with my internal

Both effect my professional growth in vastly different ways.

I may never get shot at it or physically harmed but they control my pay.

I have to get people to do things with strictly my words.

If I spoke to either in this manner. I would have to find another job

I've actually sat in roughly similar roles and the same risk would apply.



I guess I'm off base because it's so vastly different then what I can comprehend

This is why I gave up making accusations and just started asking questions. No one is wrong in My book. I just want to understand the scenario

 

[cfives]

Things can be edited and taken out of context, but the officer escalated the situation unless the audio is a severe cut and paste edited.

Even if the officer knew the mother as a known scammer who used her children as bait in civil lawsuits (unlikely), replying "why not" when told that adults have no right to lay hands on littering children is unprofessional at the very best for a police officer.

 

[Shaggy]

I don't know what happened. I just know what I reviewed.

Outside of his comments and lack of informing her of why she was arrested I see nothing inherently wrong with it. I'm not saying nothing illegal or nothing outside of the realm of legal. Just nothing inherently wrong

The rest is all "unknown" and yes. We should wait to pass judgement on either side
I don't pass judgement either way. I'm aware it could be all lies but I'm also of the beliefs that cops lie all the time as much if not more then the "bad guys"

Well I'm sorry you feel that way. I can't really argue against how you feel.

Some of us work really hard to keep our communities safe and constantly battle the negative image passed off by the media and a few dumbass cops.

Can you explain why a report was never taken regarding the original accusation?

Of the choking of a 7 year old boy?

Can you explain why both of the daughters were placed under arrest?

I can't definitively explain anything. I can guess though...

Maybe the officer talked to the involved parties and determined that there was no "choking" (like I mentioned before). Quite frequently (and other cops can attest to this), the information given to Dispatch does not coincide with the information given at the scene. Further questioning often determines that the original claim was unfounded.

As for the arrest of the two daughters, I don't know who everyone is in the video. It's clear in the video that the female in the pink interferes with the officer's arrest of the heavyset woman in the white shirt. She is seen here boxing the officer out like she's playing for a rebound in basketball:

The woman in the black zip up sweatshirt and gray pants could have been arrest also (she may have been after the fact for all I know). Here she is trying to pull the officer away while during his arrest of the heavyset woman in the white shirt:

I'm assuming the heavyset woman in the white shirt is the woman who had the traffic warrants. The video clearly shows that she is not submitting to the officer's arrest.

I just struggle. I know who my customers are both internal and external and whether I like it or not they both impact my career. I have to deal with very abrasive people re my external customers and have to enact change with my internal

Both effect my professional growth in vastly different ways.

I may never get shot at it or physically harmed but they control my pay.

I have to get people to do things with strictly my words.

If I spoke to either in this manner. I would have to find another job

I've actually sat in roughly similar roles and the same risk would apply.



I guess I'm off base because it's so vastly different then what I can comprehend

This is why I gave up making accusations and just started asking questions. No one is wrong in My book. I just want to understand the scenario

I appreciate you at least recognizing that policing and corporate/retail are totally different worlds. I'll be happy to try and answer any questions you have. I can give insight as to police policy, procedure and criminal law (mostly in California). Unfortunately I only have conjecture regarding this incident.

 

[mercurial]

Mom deserved everything she got. As Nick mentioned, it seems unlikely that the guy started to literally choke a 7 year old, and then just stuck around to see what the police thought about it. The kid littered, the guy tried to call him out on it because Mama wasn't doing her job teaching her child to be civilized, and then it escalated with man probably grabbing the kids arm when the kid mouthed off. Amazing that even when the mom is confronted with the fact that her parenting skills may be wanting, she tries to deflect and say that the man didn't prove anything to her. As if a random person would really come up to you and lie about your kid littering, so he could choke the kid.

 

[cfives]

The kid littered, the guy tried to call him out on it because Mama wasn't doing her job teaching her child to be civilized, and then it escalated with man probably grabbing the kids arm when the kid mouthed off. Amazing that even when the mom is confronted with the fact that her parenting skills may be wanting, she tries to deflect and say that the man didn't prove anything to her. As if a random person would really come up to you and lie about your kid littering, so he could choke the kid.

So it is ok to choke (or grab) a 7 year old child because they are littering? Move to Seattle, they take littering and jaywalking seriously!!! A stranger putting their hands on a child in a nonconsensual manner is far from trivial.

 

[Yakoo752]

It takes a community...

 

[Shaggy]

So it is ok to choke (or grab) a 7 year old child because they are littering? Move to Seattle, they take littering and jaywalking seriously!!! A stranger putting their hands on a child in a nonconsensual manner is far from trivial.

Oh, stop it. I haven't seen a single person in this thread advocate choking a 7yo boy for littering...

Did you read his post at all?

...it seems unlikely that the guy started to literally choke a 7 year old, and then just stuck around to see what the police thought about it...

Another permutation may be that the adult was going to call the police for the kid littering and the kid tried to leave the scene. The adult then tried to physically stop the kid from leaving the scene before police arrived (effectively a private person arrest).

 

[Yakoo752]

Not sure about Texas but is it legal to enact a private person arrest for less then a felony? In what instances?

Is littering either?

 

[bojangle]

Things are often not what they are originality reported to be. We were just recently responding to a fight call involving 10 people, and someone damaging vehicles. While en route, it appeared that it was one male causing all the problems. We arrive in the area and detained a male who was running. Didn't even have a good description on him yet. He had blood on his hands.

Just then a female approaches. She came from a couple streets down and said the guy we had detained had just tried to take her child. After talking with some kids, turns out he didn't even touch any of them. And this wasn't even an intentional lie, like we often get. Just the nature of investigating stuff in progress / just occurred.

Point is, it's entirely possible that the officer already had a good idea of what happened, or didn't happen, before the video started recording. It's also common, in my city, to run warrant checks on involved parties while en route, if we have enough info to do so. Often we will know warrant, Parole, or probation status before we arrive on scene. Lots of factors might encourage the officer to act in the somewhat dismissive manner of the original complaint, as seen on video.

While anything is possible, I think the least likely scenario is that the man actually choked a child for littering, followed by the officer completely failing to investigate that issue, and instead provoking the complaining family into a frenzy where he then arrests them because he is unprofessional and biased against black people.

 

[mercurial]

I wouldn't grab a strange kid, but only because I don't want the drama or the liability. But I do think there is something to be said about kids having a little fear and cognizance that a community will enforce some level of civility, even if their parents don't.

I might be fearful or angry if my child got manhandled, but that wouldn't happen because if someone pointed out that my child was littering and talking back about it, I would be the one up in my child's face making her go pick it up. So it would never even get to that point.

 

[bojangle]

Not sure about Texas but is it legal to enact a private person arrest for less then a felony? In what instances?

Is littering either?

In California, yes. If a violation (infraction or misdemeanor) in fact occurred, and occurred in the person's presence. In California we also have 26 PC to contend with for juveniles under 14 years old.

PC 26. All persons are capable of committing crimes except those belonging to the following classes:

One Children under the age of 14, in the absence of clear proof that at the time of committing the act charged against them, they knew its wrongfulness...

 

[Shaggy]

Not sure about Texas but is it legal to enact a private person arrest for less then a felony? In what instances?

Is littering either?

Private persons have basically the same power of arrest as police in California. I have no clue what they do in Texas, but since they have vigilante Border Patrol, I would guess it's the same if not more lenient.

Laws of arrest for Police Officers in California:

836.
(a) A peace officer may arrest a person in obedience to a warrant, or, pursuant to the authority granted to him or her by Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, without a warrant, may arrest a person whenever any of the following circumstances occur:
(1) The officer has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense in the officer’s presence.
(2) The person arrested has committed a felony, although not in the officer’s presence.
(3) The officer has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a felony, whether or not a felony, in fact, has been committed.

Laws of arrest for Private Persons in California:

837.
A private person may arrest another:
1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.
2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence.
3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.

The only difference is that a Police Officer can arrest on a suspected felony whereas a Private Person must be sure a felony has been committed.