<3 Chicago Police: Brutal

[BigSqwert]

He barely beat her

 

Yeah, they must have used CGI in that video.

 

Also, what makes this comical is that her boyfriend beat the crap out of her the week after this fight with the cop, breaking her hip, and getting charged with only a misdemeanor.

 

That has no relevance to this case IMO.

 

Again, this is a case of the media making the police look like the bad guys...

I think the cop made himself look like the bad guy that he is. The media didn't need to do a damn thing. I can't believe you have some sympathy for this piece of s***.

Edited April 13, 2007 by BigSqwert

[BearSox]

bad week for chicago cops continues: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/25/bar.attac...=rss_topstories

You know why they haven't showed that video to the public? Because it was just actually a shove fight. Also, the only reason why anything started was because the one copper's dad had recently died, and the 6 cops stopped into the bar, and that one cop was crying, so those 4 no-goods started harrasing him...

 

Let me ask you this. You and your buddies stop into a bar to help cheer up your one buddy who's dad has just died, and a bunch of a-holes start giving him s*** because he is crying. Would you not stick up for your buddy? Or would you tell those guys to shut the f up?

[BigSqwert]

Sorry BearSox. Not too many people are going to sympathize for cops that go around and beat the crap out of people.

[BearSox]

Yeah, they must have used CGI in that video.

 

 

 

That has no relevance to this case IMO.

 

 

I think the cop made himself look like the bad guy that he is. The media didn't need to do a damn thing. I can't believe you have some sympathy for this piece of s***.

She only got a few bruises. This happens to bartenders all the time. A drunk has a few too many, they won't give the drunk another beer, so the drunk wants to start fighting.

 

I have no sympathy for him. But I am just showing how the media loves to make the police always look like the bad guy.

[NorthSideSox72]

Actually, after looking at the whole story and talking to someone I know who is a cop, it isn't as bad as you think, the media just makes it look worse. He barely beat her, and didn't cause any serious damage. Basically, it was a drunk person attacking a girl, causing little damage. If it wasn't a cop but just some random drunk, I am sure that this wouldn't be a big deal to the media. Do I think he should be fired, probably, as he is a police officer and shouldn't be getting drunk and starting fights. But he is going to get away without getting any charges. They first charged him w/ battery and aggravated battery, but they have dropped the battery charge, and no way he gets convicted of aggravated battery. For those of you who don't know, aggravated battery is where you brutally hurt someone, such as breaking a bone, or causing a wound that needs 25-30 some stitches, whereas regular battery is just basically punching someone, and causing a bruise.

 

Also, what makes this comical is that her boyfriend beat the crap out of her the week after this fight with the cop, breaking her hip, and getting charged with only a misdemeanor. Now, how is it fair that a no-good beats the crap out of her girlfriend and gets charged with a less serious crime then a drunk who barely hurt the girl? Also, how come the media makes no big deal out of her scumbag boyfriend?

 

Again, this is a case of the media making the police look like the bad guys... Even though that this cop is a prick...

1. You are incorrect as to what "aggravated" means. See my earlier posts. There can be various different circumstances of aggravation to elevate a charge like battery to aggravated battery. This includes but is not limited to special authorities (police officers - and in their case it works both directions), use of a weapon, age or gender differentiation (sort of the unfair fight concept), and yes, brutality. To me, this one qualified for Agg Bat on numerous of those circumstances. Now I am not an expert on Illinois criminal statues particularly (I worked in law enforcement but in a different state), but it should be pretty much the same stuff.

 

2. Not as bad as I think??? Are you serious? A guy beats up a women half his size?! He deserves to not only have his badge stripped, but to go to jail for a while (which will be particularly fun for a cop). And it isn't just the act itself and its brutality - its what it does to the cops who AREN'T slimeballs. It makes them all look bad, and worse, takes away some of their dynamic authority. This guy deserves the book.

[BearSox]

That's why its aggravated battery, not simple battery. That's what aggravated means. Special circumstances of extremity - the overmatched brutality, and the fact that he is a cop. If neither were true (if it were some dude in a bar beating up some other dude), then it would be simple battery.

In cases of aggravated battery, there must be some type of broken bone, or if there is a cut, there must be at least 25-30 stitches.

[BigSqwert]

But I am just showing how the media loves to make the police always look like the bad guy.

What did the media do here? They released a video of a cop beating the crap out of petite woman. The video speaks for itself. Anyone who saw the video and read nothing else or heard nothing else about the incident would have come up with the same conclusion.

[NorthSideSox72]

Sorry BearSox. Not too many people are going to sympathize for cops that go around and beat the crap out of people.

No s***. And I used to be one. The only way to handle this kind of thing is to break the guy in half.

 

 

In cases of aggravated battery, there must be some type of broken bone, or if there is a cut, there must be at least 25-30 stitches.

That may indeed be ONE way for it to become Aggravated. I am going to go break out my Peace Officer's handbook and see what we can find. You are just plain wrong here.

 

 

In cases of aggravated battery, there must be some type of broken bone, or if there is a cut, there must be at least 25-30 stitches.

Meanwhile, here is exhibit A, first pop from Google on Agg Bat, for you to chew on...

[BearSox]

1. You are incorrect as to what "aggravated" means. See my earlier posts. There can be various different circumstances of aggravation to elevate a charge like battery to aggravated battery. This includes but is not limited to special authorities (police officers - and in their case it works both directions), use of a weapon, age or gender differentiation (sort of the unfair fight concept), and yes, brutality. To me, this one qualified for Agg Bat on numerous of those circumstances. Now I am not an expert on Illinois criminal statues particularly (I worked in law enforcement but in a different state), but it should be pretty much the same stuff.

 

2. Not as bad as I think??? Are you serious? A guy beats up a women half his size?! He deserves to not only have his badge stripped, but to go to jail for a while (which will be particularly fun for a cop). And it isn't just the act itself and its brutality - its what it does to the cops who AREN'T slimeballs. It makes them all look bad, and worse, takes away some of their dynamic authority. This guy deserves the book.

 

The chick suffered some bruises... so what. A drunk fumbling around trying to beat up a lady. Do you know how many cases there are similar to this, but much worse? Like i stated, the chick's boyfriend beat the hamburgers out of her a week later, breaking her hip. And no one is making a deal about this.

 

And I know plenty of police officers, and they know the law pretty well, I would think. In IL, at least, aggravated battery must include a broken bone or 25-30 stitches.

 

Yes, he should be fired, as police should not be getting drunk, in public at least. But should he be shown to the world as some sort of horrible person? No. I am sure under normal circumstances he wouldn't have tried to beat her up.

[BigSqwert]

I am sure under normal circumstances he wouldn't have tried to beat her up.

He a friend of yours? How can you speak for him?

 

I would never do that to a woman in a million years whether I was drunk or sober.

[BearSox]

Sorry BearSox. Not too many people are going to sympathize for cops that go around and beat the crap out of people.

go around and beat the crap out of the people??? Which one are you talking about? The 5-6 cops sticking up for their buddy?

 

Or where the drunk cop beat the chick? Who cares about this one? Fire him, and charge him with a misdemeanor. Don't show the world and try and make him seem like Hitler.

[BigSqwert]

Which one are you talking about?

Referring to both cases in question.

Edited April 13, 2007 by BigSqwert

[BearSox]

He a friend of yours? How can you speak for him?

 

I would never do that to a woman in a million years whether I was drunk or sober.

You say that now, but sometimes you have no control of what you will do when you are drunk. And no, I do not know him personally, or do I know anyone who does know him. I just like to think he joined the force as a way to help the community, in the first place at least.

[NorthSideSox72]

The chick suffered some bruises... so what. A drunk fumbling around trying to beat up a lady. Do you know how many cases there are similar to this, but much worse? Like i stated, the chick's boyfriend beat the hamburgers out of her a week later, breaking her hip. And no one is making a deal about this.

 

And I know plenty of police officers, and they know the law pretty well, I would think. In IL, at least, aggravated battery must include a broken bone or 25-30 stitches.

 

Yes, he should be fired, as police should not be getting drunk, in public at least. But should he be shown to the world as some sort of horrible person? No. I am sure under normal circumstances he wouldn't have tried to beat her up.

 

Here is your answer...

 

Page down or search for "Sec. 12‑4. Aggravated Battery.". There are at least 17 different possible circumstances of aggravation notated for battery alone.

 

You are misinformed.

[Soxy]

You say that now, but sometimes you have no control of what you will do when you are drunk.

I could not disagree with you more. And if people have that little control while drinking 1.) They probably have a drinking problem and 2.) They should stop drinking to that excess.

[BearSox]

Here is your answer...

 

Page down or search for "Sec. 12‑4. Aggravated Battery.". There are at least 17 different possible circumstances of aggravation notated for battery alone.

 

You are misinformed.

This is the first line from that...

 

A person who, in committing a battery, intentionally or knowingly causes great bodily harm, or permanent disability or disfigurement commits aggravated battery.

 

He wasn't sober when this happened, he was DRUNK! One reason why this was just battery. Another reason is that he did NOT inflict any serious damage to the victim, but only bruises. He didn't use any weapons either. And he did not know the bartender personally either.

 

There is no question that this guy should be fired. BUT, why should the media get so involved, and there is no reason why he should be charged with aggravated battery. There should be no sympathy for him, because he made his bed. But, there is no reason for him to be practically called the second comming of Hitler because he is a cop. If the media makes such a big deal out of this, then should make a big deal out of every battery case involving a man beating a woman.

 

 

I could not disagree with you more. And if people have that little control while drinking 1.) They probably have a drinking problem and 2.) They should stop drinking to that excess.

I bet that this cop did have a drinking problem to begin with, and because of his drinking problem, he didn't want to stop drinking, which led to the bartender not giving him another beer, which led to him getting upset and trying to beat her up.

[BigSqwert]

Still trying to figure out why you have so much sympathy for him.

[BearSox]

Still trying to figure out why you have so much sympathy for him.

omg... I'm done... I'm not gonna say it again.

[DrunkBomber]

Aggravated battery is a more serious form of battery, and is considered a felony, (i.e. punishable by death or more than a year in prison) unlike simple battery which is a misdemeanor (i.e. punishable by less than one year in prison, or by fine only). It varies by state, but the acts most often defined to entail aggravated battery include:

 

use of a deadly weapon

 

battery in which serious bodily injury occurs, and

 

battery against a child, woman or police officer.

 

If battery against a police officer is a felony than a police officer beating someone else should be. This is severe abuse of power.

[BearSox]

If battery against a police officer is a felony than a police officer beating someone else should be. This is severe abuse of power.

 

I think he should be treated like anyone else. Since he was a copper, he should get fired, but charged with regular battery like anyone else.

 

And how exactly was that abuse of power?

[DrunkBomber]

I think he should be treated like anyone else. Since he was a copper, he should get fired, but charged with regular battery like anyone else.

 

And how exactly was that abuse of power?

Having other cops going in there and threatening and trying to bribe is abusing their power.

 

He shouldnt be treated as "anyone" else because of the oath he takes as a police officer. He is protected by special laws that say if anyone hits him, regardless of how severe it is a felony. Therefore, he should be held to the same standard.

 

Im not saying this guy is the second coming of Hitler but I do think he should be held to higher standards because of his job.

[StrangeSox]

You say that now, but sometimes you have no control of what you will do when you are drunk. And no, I do not know him personally, or do I know anyone who does know him. I just like to think he joined the force as a way to help the community, in the first place at least.

 

 

Then your ass should be locked up so you don't get drunk and beat women.

 

I can't believe you're making excuses for this guy and saying "its not so bad!" He attacked a woman half his size and tried pummeling the s*** out of her. Luckily, he was drunk and couldn't connect well enough to break her face. But he sure as hell wanted to.

Edited April 13, 2007 by StrangeSox

[BearSox]

Then your ass should be locked up so you don't get drunk and beat women.

 

 

Having other cops going in there and threatening and trying to bribe is abusing their power.

 

He shouldnt be treated as "anyone" else because of the oath he takes as a police officer. He is protected by special laws that say if anyone hits him, regardless of how severe it is a felony. Therefore, he should be held to the same standard.

 

Im not saying this guy is the second coming of Hitler but I do think he should be held to higher standards because of his job.

Okay, that is a fair statement. But I think he should be treated like anyone else since he was off-duty, and he was drunk. If he was on duty and sober, and just started whailing on an lady walking down the street, then yes, it should be a much more sever penalty.

[NorthSideSox72]

This is the first line from that...

He wasn't sober when this happened, he was DRUNK! One reason why this was just battery. Another reason is that he did NOT inflict any serious damage to the victim, but only bruises. He didn't use any weapons either. And he did not know the bartender personally either.

You really don't have any understanding of the law. That line you quoted from the ILRS:

 

A person who, in committing a battery, intentionally or knowingly causes great bodily harm, or permanent disability or disfigurement commits aggravated battery.

 

...says he did it. Being drunk does not make a person UNKNOWING of what they are doing. That key part, the "intentionally or knowingly" is prescribed to abdacate accidental acts, or acts commited due to some sort of mental defect. Drunkenness is not mental defect. If it was, DUI's would suddenly get really hard to enforce. Do you actually believe that being drunk gives you a magical exemption from legal jeopardy? It sounds as if you do, which is in fact the opposite of how the law works.

 

From a legal standpoint, your arguments are wholly without merit. The law is staring you in the face, and you still won't acknowledge it.

 

And from a personal standpoint, how you can say "so what" or "not a big deal" or anything of the like is staggering to me. I can't remember the last time I was this dumbfounded at someone's posts in here, and in the Buster, that is saying something. If you can't even acknowledge the facts right in front of you, and you actually think that this guy's drunken state was somes sort of excuse, then there is no point having a logical discussion with you on the subject.

 

I'll bow out now.

[Rowand44]

Any guy who beats up a woman deserves to have his ass kicked. And making an excuse for said person because he was drunk is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard.