SE TX Severe Police Brutality uncovered!

USEagle13

Muse
USEagle13
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
600
Criminals disgust citizens. Law enforcement criminals disgust citizens even more. Government cover ups, scandals, and corruption disgust citizens the most. There are bad apples in every bunch, but as of lately the bad apples seem rotten to the core.

I will always be a supporter of the "good and honest" individuals in government and in the uniform (I know some awesome cops/public officials)

The thing that sux is too many "crooked" public officials are not properly punished for their crimes and rarely see jail time.


Controversial video of HPD beating of teen burglar



"Four officers have been charged with crimes for the beating, and now, for the first time in this ABC13 Exclusive, we're getting to see the video.
Every patrol cop in this story has been told the video is out. The mayor wouldn't let you see it -- or the district attorney or the police chief.

It was an afternoon in March when a security camera captures the end of a Houston police pursuit. Burglar Chad Holley tries to make a run for it, but he's clipped by a police car and falls on the ground. He clearly puts his arms out in the surrender pose then folds his arms before police move in.

The first officer stomps on Holley's head and he's repeatedly kicked. We counted four officers doing the kicking.
Then one officer lands five kicks. It looks like the kicks are landing on Holley's head.
Holley has been on the ground with cops on top of him for about 20 seconds and then one officer lands five heavy punches.
The officer who did the kicking in the beginning does it again -- this time from behind. Then he stomps on the back of his leg.
And then just before Holley is picked up to be taken to a patrol car, there's another lick.

But now we make this video public -- months after the district attorney, the police chief and the mayor refused to let you see it. "



They wanted to hide it from citizens in SE TX. Now I am showing this to the whole world!



Authorities' response to video's release:

Houston Police Officer's Union Executive Director Mark Clark:

"We have thousands of officers who do a great job every day and they're not involved in this. Police officers do the best job they can do. This is a case that has to be sorted out. It's serious and it's a reflection on the department. But we have to let the system work. There's 4 people who've been charged and we'll have no comment on that until it's resolved in the courts."


Oh sure. They comment all day when regular citizens do crimes but when it is one of their own they seal their lips and try to hide things and keep them secret.

The system is broken when it comes to punishing public officials who cover things up and are prosecuted. They usually just get minor judgments that do not fit the crime.


Mayor Annise Parker:

"I was shocked and disgusted when I first viewed this tape. My feelings haven't changed. This is not acceptable in Houston. The City of Houston has fully supported the district attorney's desire to keep this video from being released prior to trial because we did not want to do anything that could jeopardize the prosecution of the police officers involved. We vigorously sought termination of the officers and continue to fight to keep them from ever again working at the Houston Police Department.

Whoever provided the video to Channel 13 is in violation of a federal court order and should be prosecuted. It is unfortunate and irresponsible that Channel 13 has chosen to air the material at this time."


I personally think it is unfortunate and irresponsible that she and other officials have been evidently covering up corruption.



Houston Police Chief Charles McClelland Jr. :

"I have already taken disciplinary action and will have no have further comment until the last case is adjudicated and or appealed."

Really!? Those officers were let back on the force. Clearly they lack responsible judgment when it comes to detaining criminals.


Well fellow JREFers. Lets discuss. What do you guys think?

I am hoping some one from the ACLU or perhaps any lawyers within this jurisdiction with a good heart will follow up and get these terrible officers off the street.

They are dangerous and are no better than the thugs they arrest. The only difference is that they have a badge and hide behind their uniform and "evidently" a corrupt government that has taken over H-town.

Oh my goodness I will be praying for those poor citizens of Houston. The people in power evidently do not have the people's best interests in their heart!

There has also been various HPD officers also raping women and only some have been caught.

Bond lowered for former officer accused of rape

More alleged victims of HPD officer accused of sex assault

HPD officer accused of sex assault

DO NOT GO TO HOUSTON! The cops may rape you!!!!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
It doesn't appear to be a cover up. It seems like they were taking actions to charge the officers. Their reasoning for not wanting to release the tape were likely to provide the officers with a fair trial. It's most unfortunate that most high publicity cases are tried in the court of public opinion before they are put to a jury. The video seems pretty clear that the officers involved were completely in the wrong for their actions and from what I see, nobody was trying to stop it, but all the facts will come out in the trial.
 
Our department is hardly on the "mean streets". Campus law enforcement is mostly of the kinder, gentler variety. I haven't been involved in a resisting incident for some time.

However, during my 10 years with one of the local departments, I saw plenty of this sort of thing and at the beginning of my police career, it was strongly acculturated.
"Get your evens on the street, you won't get it in court."
That was the common opinion. Criminals who ran, drivers involved in pursuits... Were frequently beaten up. This was just considered to be how you did it. (I'm talking here of the late 60s and early 70s.
This varies wildly from department to department. Even in the same department...

In the adjacent St.Louis PD, it was very common in one district to have to fight with suspects. "You can't arrest me unless you can beat my ass!". This was part of the culture, the "South side hoosiers". Rural folk mostly who had moved up to the big city in search of factory jobs. They had come from places where fighting was weekend entertainment. You'd go to the gin mill, get drunk, and fight. No one got arrested....They were "just fightin'".
I mentioned that people involved in pursuits would often be beaten up, either at the scene or back at the station (no video around back then).
This was considered to be not only acceptable, but virtually necessary. These folks were only going to be convicted of traffic offenses, after all. They would do no jail time for the most part, just be fined.
Often, the mountain of citations issued for the course of the pursuit would simply be amalagamated into a single charge of "careless and reckless" driving. So, in the interest of justice...
This all became unacceptable locally fairly early-on. The main problem from the standpoint of government was really big lawsuit losses. It was also part of the criminal culture that one did not make formal complaints about abuse. Not only was it futile, it was unmanly. You "took your lickin'" and went your way.
That attitude went away when attorneys began to press and win lawsuits against police departments and city governments.
(The city of East St. Louis lost one of these and being functionally broke, deeded the city hall over to the winning plaintiff....)

Still, as we see above, it goes on. We had one locally a couple of years ago, all in the glaring light of a building security camera. Several officers lost their jobs and one was indicted. A police supervisor who did not participate but also did not stop the violence lost his job as well.
In pursuits, it's well understood that all involved will be "juiced up" on an adrenaline high. You will find yourself literally shaking from the experience. There is a very strong tendency to vent this pent-up energy (and rage) upon the suspect.
This even with in-car police video, bystander video, traffic cameras, etc, etc. almost everywhere.
We stress this constantly. You are always under observation. Everyone has a cell phone and even the worst of them takes pretty decent photos and video. Some can directly upload to YouTube....

BTW, I agree with sgtbaker that likely the governmental folks in this case held back the video so as not to "taint the jury pool". This sort of thing would be considered "unduly prejudicial" and might require at least a change of venue for any trial.
 
Bikewer said:
Our department is hardly on the "mean streets". Campus law enforcement is mostly of the kinder, gentler variety. I haven't been involved in a resisting incident for some time.

However, during my 10 years with one of the local departments, I saw plenty of this sort of thing and at the beginning of my police career, it was strongly acculturated.
"Get your evens on the street, you won't get it in court."
That was the common opinion. Criminals who ran, drivers involved in pursuits... Were frequently beaten up. This was just considered to be how you did it. (I'm talking here of the late 60s and early 70s.
This varies wildly from department to department. Even in the same department...

In the adjacent St.Louis PD, it was very common in one district to have to fight with suspects. "You can't arrest me unless you can beat my ass!". This was part of the culture, the "South side hoosiers". Rural folk mostly who had moved up to the big city in search of factory jobs. They had come from places where fighting was weekend entertainment. You'd go to the gin mill, get drunk, and fight. No one got arrested....They were "just fightin'".
I mentioned that people involved in pursuits would often be beaten up, either at the scene or back at the station (no video around back then).
This was considered to be not only acceptable, but virtually necessary. These folks were only going to be convicted of traffic offenses, after all. They would do no jail time for the most part, just be fined.
Often, the mountain of citations issued for the course of the pursuit would simply be amalagamated into a single charge of "careless and reckless" driving. So, in the interest of justice...
This all became unacceptable locally fairly early-on. The main problem from the standpoint of government was really big lawsuit losses. It was also part of the criminal culture that one did not make formal complaints about abuse. Not only was it futile, it was unmanly. You "took your lickin'" and went your way.
That attitude went away when attorneys began to press and win lawsuits against police departments and city governments.
(The city of East St. Louis lost one of these and being functionally broke, deeded the city hall over to the winning plaintiff....)

Still, as we see above, it goes on. We had one locally a couple of years ago, all in the glaring light of a building security camera. Several officers lost their jobs and one was indicted. A police supervisor who did not participate but also did not stop the violence lost his job as well.
In pursuits, it's well understood that all involved will be "juiced up" on an adrenaline high. You will find yourself literally shaking from the experience. There is a very strong tendency to vent this pent-up energy (and rage) upon the suspect.
This even with in-car police video, bystander video, traffic cameras, etc, etc. almost everywhere.
We stress this constantly. You are always under observation. Everyone has a cell phone and even the worst of them takes pretty decent photos and video. Some can directly upload to YouTube....

BTW, I agree with sgtbaker that likely the governmental folks in this case held back the video so as not to "taint the jury pool". This sort of thing would be considered "unduly prejudicial" and might require at least a change of venue for any trial.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that, nowadays, you still support the actions of the police officers in the video? I ask because it is clear that you would have back when you were with the "local departments" and handing out your own brand of summary justice.
 
I've probably mentioned it before, but I know someone who took a similar beating a few years ago. He didn't run from the cops, and hadn't actually committed a crime (someone saw him moving furniture and reported it as a break in). He was in a lot of pain for a long time afterward due to broken ribs. When he asked one of the cops why they beat him up, the cop said "Why did you smile at us?" So that innocent smile was taken as some sort of defiance, and reason enough for a severe beating. There was no videotape (six cop car cameras simultaneously "malfunctioned") and those officers were not disciplined in any way other than a short paid vacation.
 
Rika said:
Don't see the evidence he supported it strongly back then either.
Click to expand...

That'll be because you turned a blind eye much like Bikewer. There is a distinct lack of evidence that he done anything to prevent it or even disagreed with the "practice", so I'm going with support, however tacit it may seem to you.

However, during my 10 years with one of the local departments, I saw plenty of this sort of thing and at the beginning of my police career, it was strongly acculturated.
"Get your evens on the street, you won't get it in court."
That was the common opinion. Criminals who ran, drivers involved in pursuits... Were frequently beaten up. This was just considered to be how you did it. (I'm talking here of the late 60s and early 70s.
Click to expand...
 
The following happened several years ago to a friend of mine (who I'll call Bob), when he was living in Texas:

Bob was in his house, minding his own business, when there was a loud, continuous, banging on the front door. He was wearing pants, but no shoes, socks or shirt. Looking through the peephole, he saw two uniformed police officers. One of them continued to bang his fist on the front door. Bob opened the door, and the following conversation took place:

Bob: Yes?
Cop: Get in the car, Lucas.
Bob: What?
Cop: I said, GET IN THE CAR, LUCAS!
Bob: My name's not Lucas. Are you sure you have the right...

At this point, both officers exchanged an exasperated look, and then one of them punched Bob in center of the face with a closed fist. Bob staggered backwards, and the officers shouldered their way into the house and knocked him down. Then, as one officer held him down, the other proceeded to repeatedly kick Bob in the head and legs, just as shown in the OP video. Without a word, they handcuffed him, dragged him outside, and threw him into the back of the police car.

As the car drove through the city, Bob told them over and over that he was not Lucas, he didn't know any Lucas, they obviously had the wrong house. In addition, he happened to have his wallet with ID in his back pocket, and begged the two officers to stop and look at his ID. Meanwhile, as the car drove on and on, the two officers ignored him, talking only to each other and referring to him in the third person: "Hah, this **** actually wants us to believe he isn't Lucas!"

After a very long time, they wordlessly pulled over, dragged Bob out of the back of the patrol car, pulled the wallet out of the back of his pants, and looked at the ID. One officer said to the other, "Huh. I guess he isn't Lucas." They uncuffed him, and then shoved him to the ground, before driving off without a word. At no point after the initial exchange in the doorway did either police officer address Bob directly. He was left with no shirt and shoes in an unfamiliar part of town with no ride home.

Some time later, he went into a police station to file a complaint. After describing the entire incident to the desk officer, he was told that it was his word against the two officers, and if he insisted upon a formal complaint, he could be charged with filing a false report. The look on the guys face told Bob all he needed to know about how far filing a complaint would get him.


There is an elitist culture among police officers in this country. A sense of "us" and "them." If you are not one of the boys in blue, then you are the enemy. However, I'm not sure what can realistically be done about this without rendering law enforcement impotent, a cure possibly worse than the disease.
 
Vorticity said:
The following happened several years ago to a friend of mine (who I'll call Bob), when he was living in Texas:
Click to expand...

Ugh. A frightening story. Hopefully most cops are cool people.

There is an elitist culture among police officers in this country. A sense of "us" and "them." If you are not one of the boys in blue, then you are the enemy.
Click to expand...

Indeed. It's true of most professions/groups, however.
 
bluesjnr said:
That'll be because you turned a blind eye much like Bikewer. There is a distinct lack of evidence that he done anything to prevent it or even disagreed with the "practice", so I'm going with support, however tacit it may seem to you.
Click to expand...

So if someone described a culture of racism they had observed decades ago would you assume they were racist unless they specifically condemned racism in their description?
 
What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, juries tend to side with cops no matter how strong the evidence is against them.

I have no problems with cops generally. My godfather's a cop here in Boston. But for some reason, a lot of people in the public seem to go with the, "they have a hard job, they protect us, etc" excuse. My opinion is that the power they have over us means they should be MORE accoutable for crimes than the general public, not less.

I'm not saying its impossible, but I'd be pretty shocked if these guys were ever convicted of something substantial. It seems whenever such stories hit the news, the officers involved routinely are just found not guilty or given slap on the wrist sentences.

This is also a problem with those "boot camp" programs teens are enrolled in. I've heard of several stories of kids being killed, with no consequences. There is the case of martin Lee Anderson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Anderson_death_controversy#Arrests_and_trial

This 14 year old boy was beaten to death in a teen boot camp. The beating was caught on tape, in which the boy showed little resistance as he was being choked, kicked, etc.

The camp and coroner's office stated that the boy died of undiagnosed sickle cell anemia, which caused him to die from minor injuries that would not typically be dangerous.

This was disputed by medical experts who examined the case, including the chief medical examiner of NH, who testified that the boy absolutely died as a result of the guards' beating, not beause of sickle cell anemia. A doctor at a children's hospital who specializes in sickle cell anemia called the claim that he had died due to sickle cell anemia "laughable."

All officers involved were found not guilty.
 
Last edited:
I'm capable of speaking for myself, thanks... No, I don't condone such things, merely reporting. I can't say that I was ever present at one of these "punishment" incidents, though I had seen the aftermath. I also heard numbers of my colleagues bragging about same.
This sort of thing was not limited to grunt officers involved in arrests and pursuits. It was not unheard of for high-ranking detectives and investigators to hear that one of their "favorite" criminals had been brought in. They would check the guy out of the cell and proceed to "educate" the fellow as to the error of his ways.

This culture changed radically around the mid-70s. A new chief replaced the (mostly intoxicated) old one and proceeded to reorganize and "shake up" the department in line with new thinking.
People were fired. Indicted. Arrested. Took some years before the department began to look like a contemporary professional outfit.
I don't think incidents of this sort are ever going to go away. Plenty has been written on the subject; police officers are often subject to pressures unrealized by the general public and they deal on a daily basis with ruined examples of humanity. It's not surprising that sometimes they go over the edge.
On the other hand, it's generally true in this country that when such things come to light, suspensions, firings, and indictments are the norm.

This is decidedly not the case in much of the world.
 
Schrodinger's Cat said:
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, juries tend to side with cops no matter how strong the evidence is against them.
Click to expand...

Most people don't have bad experiences with the police, and those who do are probably not let on juries in these cases.

I also know someone who ODed and was left convulsing on the floor of a jail cell for hours. If her mother hadn't driven 150 miles and checked on her, she would have died. Her kidneys were not functioning when she got to the hospital.

The real problems I see with this and my previous story are the number of cops involved and the coordination of the lying and covering at all levels. With the first, there were eight cops at the scene. Most of them participated in the beating. All of them lied in their reports. All of them "malfunctioned" their cameras. All of them would have lied on the stand when sued (a lawsuit was settled out of court). Not one of them stood up to say this was wrong. Surely every cop in the department knew the story, either the truth or that something was being covered up. None of them got disgusted because of that and quit. The police buzzed the victim's house for months after the incident (frequently drove by) to intimidate him. The victim was sent home after the incident before arriving at the station, once they found out he owned the house he was supposedly robbing, but the next day he was charged with resisting arrest.

With the OD, surely numerous police at the station saw her convulsing on the floor. When I see something like that, I call an ambulance.

I have no problems with cops generally. My godfather's a cop here in Boston. But for some reason, a lot of people in the public seem to go with the, "they have a hard job, they protect us, etc." My opinion is that the power they have over us means they should be MORE accoutable for crimes than the general public, not less.
Click to expand...
I think the penalties for making a false police report or committing perjury should be much higher than they are now for everyone, for a start.

One thing I noticed growing up is that most of the local cops were jerks, while all the state police I ever interacted with were good guys. A college degree was required for the state police there - I think that made a big difference.
 
Schrodinger's Cat said:
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, juries tend to side with cops no matter how strong the evidence is against them.
Click to expand...

Yes. Oh my goodness I agree 100% because in the past I have talked to a judge (I know personally & who is a great individual) about police brutality over coffee a while back over a similar incident.

The judge told me that unless the person (individual claiming brutality) has video evidence or a variety of "credible" eye witnesses then it is merely that person's word against the cops. In the court of law the cop (unless video evidence is present) the cop's word is always truth (try fighting a traffic ticket!) and the radar is NEVER broken or out calibration.

And we all know equipment CAN malfunction.


Schrodinger's Cat said:
I have no problems with cops generally. My godfather's a cop here in Boston. But for some reason, a lot of people in the public seem to go with the, "they have a hard job, they protect us, etc" excuse. My opinion is that the power they have over us means they should be MORE accoutable for crimes than the general public, not less.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. I have uncles and friends in law enforcement and they do have one of the toughest jobs you could even imagine.

But, since they have so much authority/power over the citizens they "SHOULD" be held accountable at a higher standard than a regular citizen especially when it comes to crimes they commit and judgments passed. The "bad apples" should be made an example of to dissuade others in uniform from committing offenses that are against the law.



Schrodinger's Cat said:
I'm not saying its impossible, but I'd be pretty shocked if these guys were ever convicted of something substantial. It seems whenever such stories hit the news, the officers involved routinely are just found not guilty or given slap on the wrist sentences.
Click to expand...

As of right now the NAACP is getting involved and are doing a press conference @ 4:45. My prays have been answered!

Thank you Jesus! The Lord God Almighty has inspired the heart of man again to do what is right!

Thank you God and thank you man (humans)!
 
God and Jesus didn't have much to do with anything. If the bible is any sort of realistic reference, they'd support the beating of innocent people.
 
Whats worse about the incident is the boy was hit by the car and went over the bonnet, he could have had a serious injury from that and they just ran in and started kicking!
I mean 'teach someone a lesson' by maybe making them paraplegic?
 
police brutality and Texas.

is this supposed to be a surprise? is not Texas the number one state when it comes to executions?
 
Carnivore said:
So if someone described a culture of racism they had observed decades ago would you assume they were racist unless they specifically condemned racism in their description?
Click to expand...

This is a derail, this thread is not about race and there is no comparison between an entire race of people being downtrodden and mistreated and physically abused for centuries and a few ne'er do wells and local worthies getting their licks. To answer your question though I would have to say, under the specific circumstances described by Bikewer, yes I would.

If you are telling me about the good old days when you "saw plenty of this sort of thing" and that the minority in question "were frequently beaten up and "this was just considered to be how you did it" and that "it was strongly acculturated." I have to assume that you are or were part of that culture unless you tell me otherwise.

Bikerwer has given his/her reply and my original question was directed towards him/her so there is really no point to continuing these pointless asides which are just arguing for the sake of it, so I won't.

I await the Godwin.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom