Tyreek Hill

[VakAttack]

1 minute ago, RockLobster said:

Meh. Was he complying? That is certainly debatable. 

Force may have increased the chance of someone being hurt, but (IMO) decreased the chance of that someone being the police or the general public.

These guys are just doing their job trying to make the general public safe. By all reports, Hill was making the general public less safe. That was on him.

No.  NOt by "all reports."  By the reports of the police officers being accused of improper behavior, who have osmething of a vested interest.

[RockLobster]

17 hours ago, fishbane said:

I suspect the feelings of the officer were hurt as much or more than Hill's.  But feelings really don't matter here. What matters is if the use of force was reasonable and the test for that is the Graham factors which are 

1) Severity of the crime at issue

Really minor.  Noncriminal civil infractions are alleged.

2) Threat to the safety of the officers and others

There are a few things the officer could point to here.  Hill not wanting to open the window with tinted windows are a risk.  Hill is a professional athlete and probably more of a physical threat than say an old lady.  Still he hasn't said or acted in a threatening manner.  There were no weapons mentioned or visible.  There isn't an immediate threat to anyone.

3) Level of Resistance

Low to nonexistent.  He is not actively resisting nor actively fleeing nor was he at any point during the stop.  He is not really passively resisting either.  Remaining in the car would be passive resistance.  He is exiting the vehicle.  He said he is getting out.  He has removed his seatbelt, opened the door, and is stepping outside when he is grabbed and thrown to the ground.

Let's be real these guys weren't thinking of Graham factors when they pulled him out.  They were put off by Hill's attitude.  It's reasonable that they dislike being talked to like that, but it's not a justification to use force.

I disagree with you strongly on some of these points:

1) Severity - agreed, not major.

2) Threat 

1. Hill took a threatening pose immediately by aggressively and repeatedly questioning the officer. This was a red flag that was of Hill's own doing. It was unacceptable behavior and set the stage for all that came after.
2. Hill's reluctance to open his window, keep it open, and open it again after he closed it all posed a threat
3. Weapons may or may have been part of the scenario, but the chaos at this point would have masked any.
4. Agree with me or not, but at this point I believe the safe procedure would be to remove Hill from the vehicle.

3) Resistence - Hill attempted to remain in the car and delay as much as reasonably possible. It was over soon after.

[VakAttack]

15 minutes ago, RockLobster said:

 

3) Resistence - Hill attempted to remain in the car and delay as much as reasonably possible. It was over soon after.

Just...no.  I disagree with almost everything , but this last one is just completely untrue.  I just went and watched the body cam footage again.  From the moment they told him to get out until when the door opened was approximately 8 seconds.  Not to mention, as I've mentioned repeatedly, they told him to get out and he was getting out of the car, but the moment the door was open the cops immediately escalated the situation into a physical encounter for no reason.

[RockLobster]

14 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

...except cops are part of LAW enforcement.  They are part of the legal system.  They know the difference between a civil traffic infraction and criminal traffic offense.  You're picking and choosing when you want to let words have their actual meanings within a given context.  If I told you "I'm feeling blue" I'm pretty sure you'd be able to tell I was talking about feeling sad, not that I'm feeling like a color.  These cops are part of the legal system, and are bound by those definitions and laws.  They know they can't arrest a person simply for speeding except in certain circumstances, which were clearly not met here.  These cops pushed the boundaries and stepped over thel ines of what they're allowed to do under the law.  I'm sorry that this seems to offend you.  Tyreek Hill did nothing wrong here other than be an asshole at the beginning, which is not an arrestable offense.  IT certainly didn't warrant the multiple physical attacks he got from the police, including after he was handcuffed.

Cops are given special powers within our society, and they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of society, but you would have us hold them to a lower standard.  Insane.

Exactly the opposite. I'm using words specifically within the context of US English language. Which is the common denominator for most of us here. (I would imagine a similar discussion in a law forum would go much differently.)

I'm not offended in any way. I'm disinterested in emotion in this discussion. Which is the only reason I felt comfortable engaging in the discussion.

Without question, Hill made mistakes. Many that led to the ensuing events. There is no doubt the officers also made mistakes. Would the officers have made the mistakes without Hill's bad attitude and non-compliance? We'll never know. 

Certainly, cops carry guns and are allowed to shoot people in some situations - among other things. No doubt, that is a position of higher authority that carries more responsibility along with the additional power. And, yes, a higher standard is required here.

But to claim that somehow a civilian can push the boundaries and yet argue they "did nothing wrong" is asinine.

[RockLobster]

30 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

Actually, they knew almost immediately once they had his driver's license exactly who he was.  On one of the body cameras you can see them discussing it.  And then after that one of the officer kicked him while he was in handcuffs.

I've watched at least a dozen videos. And none that I've seen has shown any of that discussion - and none has shown Hill being kicked while in handcuffs.

If this is true. Then that would be a significant factor here.

[RockLobster]

31 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

No.  NOt by "all reports."  By the reports of the police officers being accused of improper behavior, who have osmething of a vested interest.

Yes - by "all reports." My words. In reference to the many reports I've searched out and have read.

Obviously I haven't read every possible report, neither have you.

Don't go down that road.

[RockLobster]

9 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

Just...no.  I disagree with almost everything , but this last one is just completely untrue.  I just went and watched the body cam footage again.  From the moment they told him to get out until when the door opened was approximately 8 seconds.  Not to mention, as I've mentioned repeatedly, they told him to get out and he was getting out of the car, but the moment the door was open the cops immediately escalated the situation into a physical encounter for no reason.

I had said Hill remained in the car and chose to delay as much as possible. This is in reference to the window up-and-down and clear unwillingness to comply with the officer's window requests.

We're discussing two different time periods.

From the moment they told him to get out, you are correct, it unfolded quite quickly.

[VakAttack]

7 minutes ago, RockLobster said:

I've watched at least a dozen videos. And none that I've seen has shown any of that discussion - and none has shown Hill being kicked while in handcuffs.

If this is true. Then that would be a significant factor here.

here is some footage of the kick.

And in the second video here, you can hear them discussing his identity.

 

[VakAttack]

4 minutes ago, RockLobster said:

I had said Hill remained in the car and chose to delay as much as possible. This is in reference to the window up-and-down and clear unwillingness to comply with the officer's window requests.

We're discussing two different time periods.

From the moment they told him to get out, you are correct, it unfolded quite quickly.

You have still not been able to articulate a single reason why it was ok for these officers to escalate this situation into a physical encounter.  Cops get people out of their vehicles all the time without doing what they did here.  All of this happened because they felt disrespected, and so they abused their power.  The punishment for what Hill allegedly did is a traffic citation. He got that.  What will be their punishment for needlessly physically attacking a citizen?  Typically nothing.  Maybe forced desk duty for a month.

 

20 minutes ago, RockLobster said:

Exactly the opposite. I'm using words specifically within the context of US English language. Which is the common denominator for most of us here. (I would imagine a similar discussion in a law forum would go much differently.)

I'm not offended in any way. I'm disinterested in emotion in this discussion. Which is the only reason I felt comfortable engaging in the discussion.

Without question, Hill made mistakes. Many that led to the ensuing events. There is no doubt the officers also made mistakes. Would the officers have made the mistakes without Hill's bad attitude and non-compliance? We'll never know. 

Certainly, cops carry guns and are allowed to shoot people in some situations - among other things. No doubt, that is a position of higher authority that carries more responsibility along with the additional power. And, yes, a higher standard is required here.

But to claim that somehow a civilian can push the boundaries and yet argue they "did nothing wrong" is asinine.

Nope. Your common language argument means nothing here.  These are officers of the law, and they operate under legal definitions under Flirida law.  There was no crime committed.  They don't get to arrest people or even detain people just for traffic infractions.  They can't even extend a traffic stop to investigate for a crime.  They have to have an immediate reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime, nitnjust vague fears about what "might happen", which they clearly didn't or they would have pulled him out of the car immediately. On a pure traffic stop,  they have to write the ticket and let you go.

The bad cops in society get away with violating people's rights because of attitudes like yours.

[RockLobster]

25 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

here is some footage of the kick.

And in the second video here, you can hear them discussing his identity.

 

I watched all of the videos multiple times.

• I did not see an officer kicking Hill. (I really expected that I would, but I simply didn't.)
• Identity. Meh, one officer says 'you know who he is, he's a star player for Miami' and that's it. Nobody else in the video appears to care one way or the other. Doesn't appear it was a factor either way.

BUT if there is a part of any video that actually shows someone kicking Hill - please post (and note the event time.)

[RockLobster]

27 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

Nope. Your common language argument means nothing here.  These are officers of the law, and they operate under legal definitions under Flirida law.  There was no crime committed.  They don't get to arrest people or even detain people just for traffic infractions.  They can't even extend a traffic stop to investigate for a crime.  They have to have an immediate reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime, nitnjust vague fears about what "might happen", which they clearly didn't or they would have pulled him out of the car immediately. On a pure traffic stop,  they have to write the ticket and let you go.

The bad cops in society get away with violating people's rights because of attitudes like yours.

And again - NOPE - this isn't a discussion of law and legal codes of individual states. It isn't a lawyer's forum. 

This is an internet forum discussion, where we primarily speak English.

How the officers operate with their 10-4's and 10-24's and Florida law codes are too deep in the weeds to reasonably expect us all to research and understand. 

We use common English language for forum discussion. Which is exactly how it should be. My attitude is sound.

You're wrong here. Get over it.

[Wrestleknownothing]

5 hours ago, VakAttack said:

Actually, they knew almost immediately once they had his driver's license exactly who he was.  On one of the body cameras you can see them discussing it.  And then after that one of the officer kicked him while he was in handcuffs.

I am incredulous that they did not know before they pulled him over that he was one of the Dolphins players. They are working traffic control outside the stadium, on game day, on the route the players take, at the time the players arrive, and Hill was driving in a rare supercar. These cops were not there randomly. They were specifically assigned to work there on game day.

[Caveira]

3 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I am incredulous that they did not know before they pulled him over that he was one of the Dolphins players. They are working traffic control outside the stadium, on game day, on the route the players take, at the time the players arrive, and Hill was driving in a rare supercar. These cops were not there randomly. They were specifically assigned to work there on game day.

I have a bunch of family and neighbors in the police department in Chicago.  I don’t get the sense that these departments are that sophisticated.  

[Scouts Honor]

On 9/12/2024 at 1:00 PM, fishbane said:

Sounds like you don't have the temperament to be a police officer.  It's kind of difficult to lose your temper quicker than the officer that made the stop, but if you think you're up to the task lol.  How would you go about it?  Would you order him out of the car sooner?  Would you threaten to break his window 2s after telling him to get out instead of 4?

does it matter? 

[fishbane]

13 hours ago, RockLobster said:

I don't know either. Neither of us was there. We couldn't possibly comment on it either way without being there.

Yet the police did see the seatbelt violation per their on-site visual record. These are things they are trained to see.

I said I don't know, but it's more that I don't believe that the officer saw it before stopping him.  Sure we can comment on it.  Hill said "He didn't do nothing."  How could you possibly comment on that?  Take his on-site visual record at face value.  Neither of us were there.

This and the semantics surrounding the word crime/criminal all goes back to your original statement

Quote

This is a driver who has broken at least two laws and was now being pulled over for criminal behavior. It's not like he didn't do anything wrong - he had. And he all but admitted it.

An even handed rephrasing would be that.  A Miami police officer saw a car driving a speed that appeared in excess of the posted speed limit.  A traffic stop was initiated.  Upon approaching the vehicle the officer noticed the driver was not wearing a seatbelt.  Subsequently two citations for minor traffic violations were issued.

[fishbane]

13 hours ago, RockLobster said:

Meh. Was he complying? That is certainly debatable. 

The only command he needed to comply with was the one to exit the vehicle.  I don't think anyone could watch that video and conclude he was not exiting the vehicle.  

13 hours ago, RockLobster said:

Force may have increased the chance of someone being hurt, but (IMO) decreased the chance of that someone being the police or the general public.

So you think one of those officers is more likely to get hurt just standing there and watching him slowly exit the vehicle than grabbing him pulling him out and jumping on him?  Yeah okay.

13 hours ago, RockLobster said:

These guys are just doing their job trying to make the general public safe. By all reports, Hill was making the general public less safe. That was on him.

Not true.  The police accused careless driving.  Hill says he didn't do anything.  Sounds like conflicting reports.

[fishbane]

13 hours ago, RockLobster said:

I disagree with you strongly on some of these points:

1) Severity - agreed, not major.

Not here.  Minor non-criminal violation.

13 hours ago, RockLobster said:

2) Threat 

1. Hill took a threatening pose immediately by aggressively and repeatedly questioning the officer. This was a red flag that was of Hill's own doing. It was unacceptable behavior and set the stage for all that came after.
2. Hill's reluctance to open his window, keep it open, and open it again after he closed it all posed a threat
3. Weapons may or may have been part of the scenario, but the chaos at this point would have masked any.
4. Agree with me or not, but at this point I believe the safe procedure would be to remove Hill from the vehicle.

The actual criteria from Supreme Court case is "whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others."  I think it's hard to argue that any point during the stop there was an immediate threat

1. You use immediate and threat in this bullet, but then your description of the behavior is aggressive repeated questioning.  That isn't illegal and it isn't a threat.  It's nothing.  Hill telling the officer not to bang on his window is  irrelevant.
2. The window being tinted and Hill not wanting it to roll it down all the way or keep it down does pose a threat to the officers but not really an immediate one.
3. Weapons are potentially part of any police interaction, but the police did not see any weapons when the window was open.  They also didn't pat him down or check him for weapons after pulling him out, which makes me think they weren't too worried about weapons
4. I agree that the police were justified in issuing him a command to exit the vehicle.  The Graham factors address use of force not having him exit the vehicle.

13 hours ago, RockLobster said:

3) Resistence - Hill attempted to remain in the car and delay as much as reasonably possible. It was over soon after.

Three seconds from the time he was told to exit the vehicle he said he would exit the vehicle.  8s after the initial command he was exiting the vehicle.  We agree any delay was a reasonable amount of time.

Under Graham the court looks at what a reasonable officer would do under the totality of the circumstances.  Yeah a reasonable officer might ask him to exit the vehicle.  But the use of force as he is exiting is unreasonable.  What can you point to in the Graham factors or otherwise justifies the use of force on a man exiting a vehicle like that?  

[Paul158]

1 hour ago, Scouts Honor said:

does it matter? 

Not really. He is a big time pro football player. He is late to get to the football stadium. He really doesn't have time for this frivolous stuff. So he told the officer just give my ticket and bro don't knock on my window like that. Maybe he will learn something from all this. Maybe the policeman could learn something also. There have been a good number of cops who have been shot at stops like this over the last several years.

[RockLobster]

9 hours ago, fishbane said:

I said I don't know, but it's more that I don't believe that the officer saw it before stopping him.  Sure we can comment on it.  Hill said "He didn't do nothing."  How could you possibly comment on that?  Take his on-site visual record at face value.  Neither of us were there.

You don't know (neither do I.) Which is why I had posted that we can't comment on it... but it may have been more clear to have posted that "we can't intelligently comment on it."

So, sure anyone can comment. Intelligence be damned. That is the bulk of the internet. But I prefer intelligent posting.

[RockLobster]

9 hours ago, fishbane said:

This and the semantics surrounding the word crime/criminal all goes back to your original statement

Get over this one. A crime is committed when someone breaks the law. Those that do so are criminals.

Try to use your lawyer schmawyer bullshit to try to misdirect the simple words of the english language into lawyer speak.

Doesn't change a single thing when we aren't in court.

[RockLobster]

9 hours ago, fishbane said:

An even handed rephrasing would be that.  A Miami police officer saw a car driving a speed that appeared in excess of the posted speed limit.  A traffic stop was initiated.  Upon approaching the vehicle the officer noticed the driver was not wearing a seatbelt.  Subsequently two citations for minor traffic violations were issued.

Except you'd be changing the facts about what actually occurred. The seatbelt violation was reported as being observed prior to the stop.

Edited September 14 by RockLobster

[RockLobster]

9 hours ago, fishbane said:

The only command he needed to comply with was the one to exit the vehicle.  I don't think anyone could watch that video and conclude he was not exiting the vehicle.  

He was not complying with the order to exit the vehicle. He delayed as much as reasonably possible while talking on a cell phone. He was non-compliant for that duration.

When the doors were opened, he put his leg out of the door. But made no effort to get out in any way. None.

Watch the video again.

He wasn't using his leg to stand up, he was using it as leverage to remain in the vehicle. (Ask any wrestler, without the leg as a point of support, it would have been easy for the police to pull him out.)

One officer decided enough was enough, and yanked him out despite his non-compliance. That was not a easy task, this was a fit top NFL player... who then responded, in shock, "Damn..." Watch it again. It's not difficult to see.

Hill was not voluntarily exiting the vehicle. He was trying his best to stay in the vehicle and delay.

[RockLobster]

9 hours ago, fishbane said:

Not true.  The police accused careless driving.  Hill says he didn't do anything.  Sounds like conflicting reports.

The crux of this entire thread. Hill says he didn't do anything.

Except clearly he was not doing what he should have done. This set up a course of events that shouldn't have happened.

And - he has openly admitted this on TV multiple times. He has admitted over and over that he should have done better.

[Saylors_Tiny_Willie]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/report-officer-who-detained-tyreek-hill-has-been-suspended-six-times

[VakAttack]

1 hour ago, Saylors_Tiny_Willie said:

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/report-officer-who-detained-tyreek-hill-has-been-suspended-six-times

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, Miami and the surrounding areas is particularly known for lack of police oversight and corruption, both in local government and in law enforcement.  A couple of years ago they hired a police commissioner famed for rooting out corruption, and then fired him within like 6 months after he started talking about how high the corruption went.