Grandpa Tastes Concrete Over Videogames

[Kopikatsu]

Newman was arrested formally for shoplifting and resisting arrest after being treated at a local hospital. He was released from jail in the early hours of Saturday morning.

So.. he still went to jail? Even after his face was smashed in thus blood was spilled all over his face? All because he stuck a video game in his pants while cops assumed that the old guy with his grandson was 'resisting arrest'. I admire cops, but that sounds like a poor excuse. Sounds like to me the cops got carried away and wanted to take out the threat before it could happen spite that the guy was harmless to begin with.

This is why I dislike Black Friday.. innocent people get hurt. Then they pay consequences while the pepper spray lady with other 'rational' people got away with their attempts to get good deals first. America sucks which brings a tear to my eye. It's no longer about supporting fellow man, but surviving the crises for him/herself. Even Congress doesn't care now... they're spending our tax money on things like proving that pizza is a veggie. Seriously..? I'm just overtaken by all of this.. the grandpa deserves better.

By the way... proof that he wasn't resisting arrest is all in the clip. The cops ignore the questions being asked and try to 'clean' up the blood with shocked expressions on their faces. That means they know they overdid it.. the old guy didn't stand a chance.

He went to jail after being treated at a hospital. Since he was at the hospital for less than a day, it's likely that the only injury Newman sustained was a broken nose. A bloody injury to be sure, but not serious. Also, there is evidence that he was resisting arrest in that video. The official statement made by the police said that after they got one cuff on Newman, he started flailing his arms around (along with the metal cuff, which is considered a weapon). If you look at the start of the video, Newman has a pair of handcuffs partially on already.

Since the other side of the story (From David whatever of CNN) says that Newman was completely cooperative and was being led away when the cops swept his feet out from under him...I'm siding with the police on this one. Laws and procedure aren't valid in every single situation that crops up. The fact that there was a conflict in this case (Taking down the suspect when they're resisting arrest is standard procedure, but was a problem because the floor was concrete and Newman landed face first), doesn't mean that the procedure failed. There will be exceptions to everything.

I.E. Shit happens and hindsight is 20-20.

 

[Kopikatsu]

He went to jail after being treated at a hospital. Since he was at the hospital for less than a day, it's likely that the only injury Newman sustained was a broken nose. A bloody injury to be sure, but not serious. Also, there is evidence that he was resisting arrest in that video. The official statement made by the police said that after they got one cuff on Newman, he started flailing his arms around (along with the metal cuff, which is considered a weapon). If you look at the start of the video, Newman has a pair of handcuffs partially on already.

Since the other side of the story (From David whatever of CNN) says that Newman was completely cooperative and was being led away when the cops swept his feet out from under him...I'm siding with the police on this one.

*Rewatches the beginning* ..Mm, you may be right. However, if I was him with a broken nose I too would flail my arm because the pain with my nose being broken would be to much for me to hold still (which the cops try to cuff him spite they should of treated him first). I usually side with cops, since most scenes are taken to make them look bad... but to cause a guy's nose to break by slamming him when he's that old? (I know age shouldn't matter, but look at the cops and compare... hard to believe they needed to use that much force.)

Regardless who's right or wrong, he wasn't stealing since he never left the store. Black Friday is a cursed day, making people crazy thus cops are human so they too can get out of hand with all the chaos around. Innocent people pay, while the pepper spray lady and others who are at guilt get away with it... and the products. Just bothers me how the cops handled the situation, it's like they want to brush off what happened but it's to late. I bet they'll be sued... even if not the cops, Walmart will get the karma.

He was flailing around before receiving the broken nose. His flailing was why the police swept his feet out from under him, which is how Newman ended up breaking his nose in the first place. Also, they didn't slam him...he just happened to fall badly (As in, on his face). As for age, 54 is mid-life. He's not even a senior yet. Although that's still something that should have been taken into consideration, Black Friday is a high stress situation, hindsight is 20-20, and you probably shouldn't resist arrest. Nothing good ever comes of it.

Nobody said he was stealing. Shoplifting and stealing are different. (You have to actually leave the store premises to be stealing. You can shoplift in the US without leaving the store.) Arizona in particular has rather strict laws on shoplifting. So just putting the game in his waistband is enough to constitute shoplifting there as defined by Arizona statute 13-1805: Section A: Subsection 5.

Wal-Mart will probably get in trouble though, yes. (On the other hand, I don't think they've ever gotten in trouble even when people literally stab each other to death in the store.)

 

[Kopikatsu]

He was flailing around before receiving the broken nose. His flailing was why the police swept his feet out from under him, which is how Newman ended up breaking his nose in the first place. Also, they didn't slam him...he just happened to fall badly (As in, on his face). As for age, 54 is mid-life. He's not even a senior yet. Although that's still something that should have been taken into consideration, Black Friday is a high stress situation, hindsight is 20-20, and you probably shouldn't resist arrest. Nothing good ever comes of it.

Nobody said he was stealing. Shoplifting and stealing are different. (You have to actually leave the store premises to be stealing. You can shoplifting in the US without leaving the store.) Arizona in particular has rather strict laws on shoplifting. So just putting the game in his waistband is enough to constitute shoplifting there as defined by Arizona statute 13-1805: Section A: Subsection 5.

Wal-Mart will probably get in trouble though, yes. (On the other hand, I don't think they've ever gotten in trouble even when people literally stab each other to death in the store.)

Sorry to ask, do you have a video of him doing so before the fall? I'd like to see it, not really for debate proof but to see how cops handled it (which makes me wonder why did they trip him? They could of easily restrained him with just holding him still. That's a bad impression, because imagine if in the street a guy was flailing his arms a bit and the cops brush him off the feet on solid concrete. That's just asking for a broken nose if not the face.)

Arizona has been known to be to strict. Personally some laws are made to prevent things but really they cause problems of their own. What if you cannot hold something because you're hands are to full thus you need to place it somewhere safe? The law they have causes a problem, in certain situations thus look what happened.. old man eats it for the misunderstanding. Plus though he shouldn't of resisted arrest.. his focus was probably locating his grandson within the hostile crowd.

Believe it or not, Wal-Mart should get sued for allowing Black Friday to occur at their store. In fact, most stores in Black Friday should make rules for these types of deals since safety is a huge importance. I don't understand why they just allow everyone to run in and go wild without consideration since they know people are going to do something dangerous. The process repeats, and nothing is changed. Sometimes I think America screw people over so they get money out of it, even in a risky attempt such as Black Friday. Just saying...

Sadly, I don't. That's why I said if I had to choose between David and the Police, I'd pick the police. (Because of each account, there is evidence that contradicts David's side, but nothing against the police. 'Course, I'm sure that both sides are heavily biased, but the police's recounting is at least plausible. Either way, the security cameras will probably shed more light on that subject.)

It holds no weight, but this is my assumption of what happened. Newman sees his grandson in what he perceives as (potential) danger. He puts the game in his waistband because he doesn't have any pockets and goes to grab his grandson. A police officer sees this, and tells Newman to stop. Newman ignores him with the intention of responding after he's made sure that his grandson is safe, so the officer grabs him and says that he's under arrest. (I think this was just the officer reacting badly to a high stress situation. People do literally murder each other over a few dollars of savings on Black Friday and he had no idea how Newman might react). Newman tries to pull away from the officer, and the officer gets one cuff on Newman. Panicking, Newman starts flailing around to try and get away from the officer. This attracts the attention of a second police officer. Since the first officer doesn't want to get smacked in the head with a metal cuff, he sweeps Newman's legs out from under him with the intention of cuffing his other wrist while he was down. However, Newman fell poorly and landed on his face, breaking his nose. The video starts from there. (Again, my assumption of what happened. I make no promises. I can explain my reasoning behind this sequence of events, though.)

I don't they can do anything about it. A few years ago, people literally busted down the doors to a Wal-Mart and trampled an employee to death. What they need is a riot squad stationed at every store with tear gas, shotguns, tasers, and all the other fun equipment they use. 'Course, that's extremely impractical, so eh.

 

[ckam]

Well, that's the police for you. We got what we asked for.

 

[mariofan1000]

Even if he was shoplifting, this is still a massive over-reaction by the police.

 

[Kinguendo]

Whats the deal with innocent people always NOT wanting to be arrested? I mean, what is up with that?!

Seriously though, what the hell is this Black Friday? Is that the only time of year anything is on sale in America or something? Has "Orderly Queueing" been outlawed? Let me ask, when was the last time someone said "No please, after you." in America? This just seems like a disgusting practice, thats even before taking this brutality into consideration.

 

[cefm]

Funny thing is in many cases the police officer will run into internal discipline if he DOESN'T use an extreme level of force. Because the supervisors will point out that he placed himself (and their disability benefits funds) in danger by taking a less violent and aggressive approach that exposed him to the potential for being injured by the individual in custody.

 

[winter2]

Whats the deal with innocent people always NOT wanting to be arrested? I mean, what is up with that?!

Seriously though, what the hell is this Black Friday? Is that the only time of year anything is on sale in America or something? Has "Orderly Queueing" been outlawed? Let me ask, when was the last time someone said "No please, after you." in America? This just seems like a disgusting practice, thats even before taking this brutality into consideration.

We prefer to use the term freedom shuffling.

 

[Darkmantle]

Funny thing is in many cases the police officer will run into internal discipline if he DOESN'T use an extreme level of force. Because the supervisors will point out that he placed himself (and their disability benefits funds) in danger by taking a less violent and aggressive approach that exposed him to the potential for being injured by the individual in custody.

if that's how the police force is run, it needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. that is despicable. they are there to protect the people, not their disability funds. If you are not willing to place yourself in danger, policing is not for you. at least not up in canada.

 

[SmegInThePants]

if you think that's bad, here's a recent one from my neck of the woods:

http://mynorthwest.com/?nid=15&sid=583255

***

but back to the OP's story. The proper place to fight police is the courts. When they are actually there in front of you, whether you agree w/them or not, you say yes sir and do whatever they ask. Not to say this guy didn't do that, he may well have been cooperative and got face planted anyways. When you can help it though, better to argue about it later, w/a lawyer, maybe even make some money and get the cop fired, and save yourself from eating the floor.

on a side note, i read an interesting book about american police, talking about how police have changed. Back in the day, police had 'beats' and would be on foot, each neighborhood had its own cop. That cop would be there every day. He would know who belonged, who didn't, could detect suspicious behavior on sight, and could often stop crime *before* it happened. Whereas now, cops are isolated inside their cars, have no way of knowing who does or doesn't belong somewhere, and respond almost exclusively through the 911 system *after* the fact, not counting traffic stops and occasional stings. The modern police are far more reactive and than pro-active. hehe, then again, this guy in the OP's story was pretty pro-active, a little too much, so it obviously isn't necessarily a good thing.

but its ok, out here we have the phoenix, we don't need no police.

 

[SmegInThePants]

And you're right. It's impossible to know intent without being psychic. That's why it could just as easily be argued the other way.

and you're right, it could just as easily be argued either way what his intent was in stuffing this in his waistband, but since it has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, we need much more than that to convict him: so it would stand to reason that even if we could nab him before he's even hit the check stands that we should wait and see what he does. Arresting him before we can show beyond a reasonable doubt what his intent was is not only useless, it prevents us from gathering anymore evidence as to what he actually intended to do since we have now stopped his progress.

just look at the disagreement in this forum topic over the issue. Now imagine trying to get 12 jurors to agree beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to steal that game. Not likely. If I was a county prosecutor I surely wouldn't pursue this case.

 

[McNinja]

This is nothing compared to what the police have gotten away with in the past. there was a case brought against the police in DC where two women called the police because they were about to be raped, but the policeman went to the outside of the building knocked on the door, then left. Meanwhile, the man had dragged to two women into the room and raped them for nearly 12 hours straight. What happened to the police? Nothing.

Man get slammed to the ground? please. How about the police don't actually have to help just beccause you call 911? This is far, far worse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

 

[awsome117]

if that's how the police force is run, it needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. that is despicable. they are there to protect the people, not their disability funds. If you are not willing to place yourself in danger, policing is not for you. at least not up in canada.

But they also need to protect themselves as well. If you don't know what the guy has on him or what he is capable of, it could lead to very terrible circumstances. Also the main goal of the police is not to protect people, but to uphold the law. Also, he was willing to put himself in danger. He was an officer on duty on black friday. That is a very scary day for anyone, police in particular as regular people turn into crazy frenzy.

The argument can go either way at this point who was in the wrong, since not enough evidence is given. Me personally, I side with the cop.

 

[Darkmantle]

if that's how the police force is run, it needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. that is despicable. they are there to protect the people, not their disability funds. If you are not willing to place yourself in danger, policing is not for you. at least not up in canada.

But they also need to protect themselves as well. If you don't know what the guy has on him or what he is capable of, it could lead to very terrible circumstances. Also the main goal of the police is not to protect people, but to uphold the law. Also, he was willing to put himself in danger. He was an officer on duty on black friday. That is a very scary day for anyone, police in particular as regular people turn into crazy frenzy.

The argument can go either way at this point who was in the wrong, since not enough evidence is given. Me personally, I side with the cop.

They need to protect themselves, not assume every person they deal with is a violent criminal. Police must be willing to take risks, not be terrified of getting hurt to the point of excessive force.

EDIT: so I guess because the officer was on edge because of the scary holiday he over reacted to something minor then. sounds about right.

 

[awsome117]

They need to protect themselves, not assume every person they deal with is a violent criminal. Police must be willing to take risks, not be terrified of getting hurt to the point of excessive force.

EDIT: so I guess because the officer was on edge because of the scary holiday he over reacted to something minor then. sounds about right.

The officer was taking a risk. They took a risk subduing the suspect, even though it could lead them to harm if things took a wrong turn. Also from some source, excessive force wasn't used until the grandpa started flailing about.

Like I said, it can go either way on this one until there is more evidence revealed, if ever there is. Until then, I still side with the cop.

 

[Darkmantle]

They need to protect themselves, not assume every person they deal with is a violent criminal. Police must be willing to take risks, not be terrified of getting hurt to the point of excessive force.

EDIT: so I guess because the officer was on edge because of the scary holiday he over reacted to something minor then. sounds about right.

The officer was taking a risk. They took a risk subduing the suspect, even though it could lead them to harm if things took a wrong turn. Also from some source, excessive force wasn't used until the grandpa started flailing about.

Like I said, it can go either way on this one until there is more evidence revealed, if ever there is. Until then, I still side with the cop.

excessive force is still excessive, just saying.

and the best way to minimize risk isn't excessive force.

 

[Guardian of Nekops]

This all depends.

Security was well within its rights to go up to the gentleman and say, "Excuse me sir, but could you remove that game from your waistband and be sure to keep it out in the open? Yes, we know you weren't trying to steal anything, but it's store policy..."

If they started that way, then they should be able to escalate as far as they need to. If someone gives you attitude, you invite him back to the station. If he doesn't come along willingly, you put a hand on his shoulder and lead him. If he struggles, you tackle him. If he pulls a gun, you shoot him... escalation happens until the situation is under control, always staying one and only one step ahead of the troublemaker. That's the only way to do it... but it starts with a polite, "Excuse me, sir, but you aren't allowed to do that." Give the poor guy a chance to cooperate and explain.

On the other hand, if they just came out of left field and shoved his face into the ground, then that's uncalled for. Hopefully, the same cameras that let them see him will prove what happened one way or the other.

So then you're going to be completely calm when you're being arrested without just cause, right? We don't live in a police state, yet. Last I checked, it is your right and responsibility to determine exactly why you're being arrested before you allow the police to handcuff you.

When a police officer is talking to me, I am absolutely going to be completely calm. And consumately polite. You have the right to know what you're being charged with, sure, but the police officers have the right to defend themselves too... they're nervous, and rightly so. For all they know, you're gonna pull out a gun and shoot them. If you challenge their authority with physical force, they are going to, HAVE to, respond in kind.

IF a police officer acts improperly and doesn't read you your rights, your best bet is to cooperate, keep your mouth shut, and get yourself the cheapest lawyer you can. Hell, go with the free lawyer they provide you. You know why? Because lawyers put careless cops to shame every day. That's just about the first thing they learn to do.

However, when was the last time that physical force won out against the law of the land, and I mean actually won rather than let someone escape to go into hiding for the rest of their life? Unless you're ready to stage a revolution, physical resistance is NEVER your friend.

 

[Cyrus Hanley]

I'll reserve judgment till we get the whole story.

If he was resisting arrest at ALL, cops can and will do that to you. Regardless of if you're in cuffs or not. They don't fuck around.

There's not one fucking excuse to do this shit to an unarmed man. Not one.

And I like that "resisting arrest" is now *any and everything you could ever possibly do* while being arrested. Said the cuffs are too tight? Resisting arrest. Said your arm is about to break? Resisting arrest. Bleeding on the ground with a cop's knee in your back? Resisting arrest. Screaming because you've just been shot twice while kneeling on the floor with your hands cuffed behind you? Resisting arrest.

Screaming while being sexually assaulted? Resisting arrest.

 

[RvLeshrac]

I'll reserve judgment till we get the whole story.

If he was resisting arrest at ALL, cops can and will do that to you. Regardless of if you're in cuffs or not. They don't fuck around.

There's not one fucking excuse to do this shit to an unarmed man. Not one.

And I like that "resisting arrest" is now *any and everything you could ever possibly do* while being arrested. Said the cuffs are too tight? Resisting arrest. Said your arm is about to break? Resisting arrest. Bleeding on the ground with a cop's knee in your back? Resisting arrest. Screaming because you've just been shot twice while kneeling on the floor with your hands cuffed behind you? Resisting arrest.

Screaming while being sexually assaulted? Resisting arrest.

*snip*

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/02/police-assault-woman-who-called-for.html is the follow-up, for anyone who thinks the cops in the case may have been punished.