NYPD Officer Caught on Tape Body-Slamming Cyclist-2/2

[human0un]

so the officer assaulted the civilian then charged him with assault?

[SylvanaForrester]

The Manhattan D.A.'s office actually edited evidence out of a video?! How high up does the corruption go?

[jamil316]

ARREST him if not maybe then we Americans can Body-Slamm a Cop lolzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz­zzzzzzz just joking no American got ball to do that i think that cop got his Job back after the media went away

[googaag1]

stupid grey haird dike

[HardBodyNyC]

Theres 2 types of laws.

The laws the government set forth.

And then there are personal laws the policer officer follows. If you offend the officer BUT do not break governemnt laws, what do you think is going to happen to you?

NOWHERE IN ANY LAW does it say you must respect an officer but if you disrespect them you'll most likely get your ass beat and then have charges fabricated against you and spend a day (or more) in jail. Ands thats when you go get you .357 magnum and get justice.

[gyneve]

What do expect from armed thugs with authority and little screening or descipline?

[spleenblender]

They are screened rather heavily, actually. And they have much discipline. It is just that most of their behavior is condoned so such actions aren't seen as being undisciplined.

[maverick10241]

@spleenblender in TN  most officers come straight off the farm some have only a 6th gr.education and they get only on the job training so what we are dealing with is the GOOD OLE BOY NETWORK where its who you know that counts to get a job as a deputy or city police officer.when a cop comitts police brutality here we cant even file a complaint against them they say they will LOOK INTO IT and you never here no more about it.most guys here are just bully's they just wear a badge to get by with it

[malone61]

video of something cannot not show everything; it can also be edited, manipulated, and omitted.

It can be just as biased as any other form of media. So take warning.

[geeleegoat]

Hello malone61:

Video that is broadcast by a legitimate journalist is corroborated. You could certainly do this yourself with a little effort and will. If they have been manipulated they are subject to libel, which they are not. If you base your denial on the possibility that the video may have been manipulated, then instead of telling people to take warning, we should appreciate the video as a spring-board to our own investigation of the reality out there.

Cheers.

[malone61]

1.There is no such thing as a legitimate journalist. All journalism is inherently biased by the individual or organization producing it and, therefore, is illegitimate. 2.Why would being subject to libel change the fact the video can be false? 3.Take warning means don't believe what you see, and implicit in the statement, at least from my perspective, is to think on your own and do your own research. But perhaps you need to have it stated explicitly. Cheers.

[geeleegoat]

#1 Yes humans are bias but that does not preclude legitimacy.

#2"Why would being subject to libel change the fact the video can be false?"

That's not what I said. It can be false. Let me put it to you this way...If I were a police officer and you were a journalist that manipulated video that shows me committing a crime, and publish it as real, without a disclaimer to the contrary, you'd better hope you have a good lawyer.

#3 Point taken.

Cheers.

[malone61]

Journalism, in my opinion, is never legitimate. Documentation can be legitimate, but the field of jounalism never can be. I can watch, read, or listen to a piece of journalism from three different media outlets and get three different sets of events, facts, slants, highlights, perspectives and prejudices. Where is the legitimacy in a field which gives over only its own opinion, motivated by its own worldview and political leanings, in the guise of being unbiased, objective, and purely factual?

[geeleegoat]

You base your argument on the unsubstantiated 'opinion' that journalism is never legitimate. How can one argue with that when you've already closed it for yourself. All I can say is that there is legitimacy and its based on the scientific method. It's worked well for us up until now. Don't think of journalism as a product. Every time you relate your day's events to a friend, you are a journalist. Are you saying we can't trust what anyone says, because people are biased?

[geeleegoat]

By your logic, because humans are biased, no one can have any legitimacy in reporting facts. If I report that the government introduced a new law, and also give my biased opinion that the law is good for society, how does that change the fact that the law has been introduced? Am I defacto illegitimate? Humanity has already figured out we are inherently subjective species. Were not robotsyet. Thats why we have standard methods, rules, laws, etc. to help us muddle through the bias.

[geeleegoat]

The effort to corroborate the facts must be made ultimately by you and to your satisfaction. In all fairness though, I do see how legitimacy itself can be subjective, based on the how well informed one is.

[malone61]

You are right. You cannot argue against my opinion-it's just my opinion after all. And in answer to your question, the answer is no. If you're serious about finding out the truth, go to the primary source if possible. One of the best lessons I learned about the media was: never trust what they try to feed you. Always question, be wary, and if you can't get the primary source, get as many varied secondary sources as you can and stack them against one another. After that, still don't trust it.

[YUNGSTELF]

ture thats not mafia style

[iloveainori]

Dont be so disrespectful to the Mafia. They are well organised, and DONT attack innocents

[youyou2btoo]

lol what

[greatbroad]

It's almost like the Mafia have gone to the police academy and are putting on uniforms.