Secrets of the City

No pun intended, but that’s pretty shocking — and damning — video. Get ready to open up your wallets again, Minneapolis taxpayers.

Someone needs to break the power of the police union to protect officers who do things like this. This just never stops.

Agreed, and that ’someone’ ought to be their bosses, the Minneapolis voters — toss out Rybak and the councilmen who have proven unwilling or unable to clean up the police department, which is worse than an embarassment.

Rybak doesen’t have the power, really. It’s a “weak mayor” system. The City Council, and the mayor, and the voters could do it (along with the decent and honest cops in Mpls), if they could only get on the same page for once.

Even if there had been some kind of tussle or other resistance before the beginning of what was released on video, there is no excuse for that. It’s the apparent casualness in which the cop uses it that gets me. My own opinion is that this should be treated as a felony assault.

It’s also similar to what you might expect between siblings, where one is quietly minding their own business, and another walks by and punches the other.

Every time there is an incident like this, there’s plenty of talk form all sides that they hope that publicizing it will “bring about a change” in how the cops behave. It never happens.

This also comes a week or so after a judge basically found that the cops lied in their report on a traffic stop that resulted in use of force.

The one power Ryback may have is the nomination for Chief of Police. He could, if he wanted to, withhold (or withdraw in this case) his nomination of Dolan for a second term as Chief, if Dolan is unwilling or unable to reign in the thugs on the MPD.

What are the chances of organizing a public protest against the police by Minneapolis residents? Do you think maybe — just maybe — the message might sink in better down there at the union hall?

If one really wants to stop it from occurring, then remove the personal-liability protection in place for cops who misbehave. If officers felt like their houses, cars, cabins and boats were vulnerable in the event that misconduct was proven, there’d be a lot less misconduct.

One more comment:

Have to wonder about the safety of tasing the neck like that. Taser itself does not reccomend tasing the face or neck:

“But in a recent memo issued nationwide to police agencies, Taser says that shocks to the chest pose a small risk of injury and police agencies could protect themselves from lawsuits by avoiding the head, neck and chest.”

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/taser-warns-police-to-avoid-chest-shots-when-using-their-stun-guns/1046158

@Jack Pine: Excellent idea, with the caveat that a citizen who loses their law suit must pay court costs for both parties. That would cut down on frivolous or vengeful law suits.

nood, that caveat would probably eliminate ANY lawsuits. I think there’s such a presumption in favor of the cops by juries that few people, if any, are likely to take that chance.

If I got tasered in the neck, on video, while cooperating, I’d take the chance against the police.

Yikes, that was pretty brutal, not to mention uncalled for. Although, I can understand why it happens though.. A large majority of the people that want to be cops have that mentality.. They’re the boss, and they can do whatever they want..

And you’d win, KC — mnblrmkr is selling us too short in assuming that juries can’t see past the badge to right an obvious injustice.

I’d love to be proven wrong, Jack Pine, but I don’t think I am. Like I said, there’s a huge presumptive favoritism towards cops in the court room.

Not to mention, that a lot of people with a potential cases aren’t going to be the most sympathetic plaintiffs, regardless of the case at hand.

For example, how sympathetic are jurors going to be if it were to turn out that Mr. Ruiz is an acknowledged (or even suspected) gang member?

Like I said, there’s a huge presumptive favoritism towards cops in the court room … For example, how sympathetic are jurors going to be if it were to turn out that Mr. Ruiz is an acknowledged (or even suspected) gang member?

Would something like that even be entered as evidence? If I were the prosecutor, I would argue that a person’s affiliations — unless DIRECTLY involved with the law suit — are not admissible as evidence. If the police are free to taz someone simply on the basis of an affiliation, then we’re all in big trouble down the road.

Possibly, but part of their defense is going to be why they felt such actions were necessary. They’ll want to explain that “I was on ‘high alert’ because he’s a known/suspected (fill in the blank).” Or, “we’ve had numerous encounters with the individual before where he showed himself to be a risk.”

This story has now made Rawstory

One thing that I found extra disturbing was the clip they showed on the news last night, a bunch of police showed up and were laughing like it’s all fun and games. Maybe it is to them.

Possibly, but part of their defense is going to be why they felt such actions were necessary.

Again, that’s a very slippery slope for the police to be using in any court case. Mere affiliation or association should not be a crime. That’s tantamount to arresting someone for “driving while black.”

“Again, that’s a very slippery slope for the police to be using in any court case. Mere affiliation or association should not be a crime. That’s tantamount to arresting someone for “driving while black.””

I agree. Doesn’t mean it won’t happen.

That goes a step to far. If the guy was not compiling fine kick his ass but he was not moving in an aggressive manner. That guy is going to get a big payday, no question about it.

That said how many people do you think would take a job of being a cop if they had personal liability? My guess is very few.

I agree. Doesn’t mean it won’t happen.

Well, if we applied that logic to everything in life, we’d never have invented fire. Because it MIGHT hurt someone.

My perception is that the pendulum has swung now in the other direction. People are not as universally supportive of law enforcement in each and every situation. Clearly, having video admitted as evidence in a case like this would demonstrate to a jury that the police went “above and beyond the call of duty.”

I’m just saying that the cop will be entitled to a defense. And for a lot of people that sue, that’s what the cops are going to pull out.

I’m not convinced the pendulum has swung that much.

Looking like this is personal:

“Ruiz is charged with a felony count of first-degree damage to property in the incident, outside the 2nd Precinct headquarters, on 19th Avenue NE. near Central Avenue.

According to the criminal complaint, Lappegaard saw Ruiz standing on a planter in a corner of the precinct’s parking lot. The 18-year-old took a landscaping brick and threw it at a vehicle owned by another officer, the complaint said.

The car had large dents in its hood and its windshield broke, causing $2,135.14 in damage, according to the complaint.”

http://www.startribune.com/local/69009197.html?page=2&c=y

In the same article there is this howler from RT’s Jeremy Hanson:

“Dolan “shows he holds very high standards when it comes his officers,” Hanson said, both in taking them to task when needed and defending them.”

Update from WCCO: “Eighteen-year-old Rolando Ruiz spoke publicly for the first time about the incident last April on Wednesday.”
http://wcco.com/local/teen.tasered.talks.2.1292663.html

sounds like rolando exhibited highly unpredictable and violent behavior right before the tasing. this was definitely a personal attack by mr. ruiz.

WTF?

“Right before” the tasing, he was standing with his hands on the car. The only thing “unpredictable” was he moved his head as the cop (who already had the taser out) walked by.

It was a personal attack ON Mr. Ruiz for allegedly tossing a paver into the personal car of another cop. Cops don’t get to be judge and executioner. If the suspect is co-operating, not resisting, there is no justification for any kind of force to be used.

I’ll say it again, the cop should be charged with felony assault.

say it till your blue in the face. you can’t exhibit out of control behavior and the second before a cop reaches you, you stop, then expect the cop to treat you how you wish to be treated. this isn’t a children’s game.

Sorry Cubbie, there’s no way from the video that Ruiz was out of control at any time near the tasering.

Resistance stops, the force stops. Simple as that. Otherwise, you’re talking about extrajudicial punishment.

The big question for me is, will Rybak make a campaign platform to take the MPD thug tactics statewide?