Does the attorney for the NOLA cops who beat the 64-year-old

[SeattleGirl]

seem like a sleaze to anyone else? He's on Anderson Cooper right now, and just before he came on, they had a short interview with a Red Cross volunteer who saw the incident, and said this man did not appear to be drunk. When asked about that by AC, this attorney make a typical sleaze-attorney "statement" to the effect that this witness saw what she wanted to see, didn't see what really happened, blah blah blah. Excuse me, Mr. Sleaze, but I watched the tape too, and your boys did not seem to be acting properly. The "resistance" I saw from the 64 year old (sorry, his name escapes me right now) was NOT resisting arrest, it was resisting being beaten to a bloody pulp! Even if this man was drunk, is that any reason to beat the crap out of him? And why did they have to treat him like a murder suspect? Being drunk in public (if he was) on Bourbon Street in NOLA is a crime worthy of that kind of treatment? Oy!

[applegrove]

1. Actually - I saw the whole tape all at once. And though it is illegal

to "beat" anyone - that guy took a good long look at the camera before he refused to be handcuffed and it makes me wonder. Also - I noticed that when the cops handcuffed the guy who was making a fuss and trying to intervene - they used those twist-tie cuffs on him. Then they let him go.

If the other police were trying to use "twist tie cuffs" on the man - and he was refusing to be cuffed - pretty normal that he would end up on the ground. Resisting arrest is a crime. If he wasn't drunk - what is his excuse?

No doubt that living in NO the relationship between people and the cops is pretty sour.

Cops should not have hit him. That is bad. He should not have resisted. That is bad too.

Did anyone else catch the guy's long stare at the camera before he resisted?

[SeattleGirl]

4. I did not notice the stare

so can't comment on it. I'm sure the tape will be played again, so I'll look for it. Are you thinking he was trying to provoke something with the cops? (Not trying to flame, just wondering what your thought is about that.)

As to being on the ground, I agree it is normal, but to then proceed to beat the man like they did, well, that was just wrong. There is no excuse for that, in my opinion.

Well, I will definitely pay more attention next time it plays. (I still think the attorney is a sleaze, though!)

[applegrove]

11. Yes watch it. At the beginning. And no - there is no excuse for beating

anyone. This is a sign that it goes on and should be stopped. I am not saying anything about the cops actions that anyone else isn't saying. I'm just wondering about the victim and if - the camera played any role in his "sense of security" and perhaps changed his actions. The environment will do that. Just as if the cops had seen the camera - which some of them had not - their actions may have been different too. Doesn't change what happened.

But - yes - if the guy was not drunk - what the hell was he doing resisting arrest? Perhaps there is so much anger at Katrina that it comes out like this? Perhaps the anger is longstanding? Perhaps he and his sons have been pulled over every day of their lives? Would be good to figure that part out too - cause that would be an issue as-well - if the victim was just driven to resist arrest for some reason. Much work to be done in all around I would say.

Who knows.

Was just something that struck me. That the victim here had different information than the cops. We don't have the film of what he did to provoke the arrest - either. Again that doesn't change that the police used excessive force. Especially when there were 4 of them.

But the handcuffs too are something to ask about? Is it easier to handcuff someone with the old metal cuffs is they are resisting? Are the new cuffs being used because they are less painful to the arrestee or something?

Many questions.

No answers.

[SeattleGirl]

14. Indeed, many questions.

Hopefully, some answers (not spin) will come out.

One thing I wonder is, if the cops were not doing anything wrong, why did they go after the AP guy? Why tell the cameraman to stop filming? Seems to me that if you believe you are in the right, what better way to back it up than a video of the incident? Isn't that why more and more cop cars have video cameras in them? If they weren't doing anything wrong, why bee afraid of the video tape?

[applegrove]

21. I never ever implied the cops were not in the wrong. And that huge

aggressive attack (screaming) at the producer - is actual policy and you will see that from any professional at the scene of a crisis - when an outsider interferes .. they are trained to scream loud and long for the person to shut up and not to cross boundaries. All professionals will scream like that - it is what they are taught in terms of "establishing dominance on the scene".

I think the man who tried to intervene was handcuffed and then unhandcuffed and that is normal too.

What isn't normal is the hitting. And the resisting arrest.

Again - I never implied the cops were not wrong for hitting.

[SeattleGirl]

27. I never took your response to imply you thought the cops were right.

Sorry if it seemed that way. Internet forums are a great way to exchange ideas, opinions, and news, but unfortunately, because we cannot see the poster, or hear their tone of voice if they were actually speaking instead of typing, sometimes things can seem different than they were intended.

I actually appreciate what you have posted, especially the part about the man's stare toward the camera. I will look for that.

[applegrove]

28. I read your post one way and then when I read it again - I could

understand it the other way. Yes - easy when 70% of communication is nonverbal - and we miss all that on a forum - very easy to misunderstand.

Sorry. My fault too.

:hi:

[SeattleGirl]

29. Back at ya!

:hi:

[sproutster]

18. No offense

But are you not more apt to resisting arrest if you are innocent? Yet they are still locking you up and the nearest courthouse is in another town?

Just curious, I think I would definately try to argue the point. Especially with no phones, no lawyers.

[Booster]

20. What bothers me about the tape and no one has mentioned is

the cops on horseback trying to block the camera. If nothing was being done that wasn't "procedure", why would you want to block the camera? Seems like you would want it on tape so everyone could see your side of the story. And it was so obvious that they were trying to block the camera - I don't even think they've said they weren't.

[MrMonk]

15. Did this occur while the mounted cops were trying to block the camera?

My impression was that the guy was trying to talk over his shoulder to the cop behind him. I'm not as certain that he would notice a camera with the dancing horse moving about.

[pitohui]

17. yes the old man has parkinson's disease

i take it you have not known anyone w. this affliction

it slows down yr reaction time terribly

it can be heart-breaking

ppl who know so little abt elders & their afflictions do not need to be in law enforcement, parkinson's is not rare in this area, it is COMMON!

[sproutster]

22. :(

My uncle passed away with it.

I will say from my 16 y/o impression of it was that my uncle was slow and had shakes, like maybe an alcholic. It is a sad disease.

[applegrove]

26. Well if he has parkinson's then there is a problem. I could easily result

in mis-understanding. As could innocence, etc.

Many questions.

And the man was looking at the camera for a long pause - when you could see him from behind the horses *** - or before - right at the beginning.

Camera could have embolded him to say "I am innocent - I will talk back and not let them cuff me till I can explain". I don't know what was going on. I just know he was aware.

[RebelOne]

30. Please stop referring to this gentleman as an OLD man.

I am 66 years old and do not look or feel like an old woman. Just remember, you will be in your 60s someday and will resent being called an old man or old woman.

[KamaAina]

31. Are you saying there's a cluster of Parkinson's in N.O.?

If so, someone needs to go investigate that pronto (and bring along a data analyst whose work got Asperger disorder included in DSM-IV :-) )

[babylonsister]

2. Yes, I've seen him interviewed and he's a punk.

He keeps claiming the guy was drunk, and since no alcohol testing was done, it's the cops' word against the victim's. I don't understand why he wasn't tested though; that would have settled the issue, though no one deserves to be treated the way this man was regardless of his state of sobriety.

[sendero]

13. A charge..

... of "public intoxication" levelled by the police (in most states I believe, certainly in Texas) requires no proof of any kind.

A cop decides you are PI, he can arrest you and you have no say in the matter. It is really a stupid-ass law, and a catch-all to allow the police to basically detain anyone they want to who is not on their own property.


There was a day when police could be trusted to not abuse such laws, IMHO, those days have passed.

[pitohui]

19. they didn't test him because they knew he wasn't drunk

they know they made a mistake

[tammywammy]

3. Yes, he does

I have XM and one night last week, it was on CNN Newsnight with Aaron Brown and Anderson Cooper was also on. They were showing an extended version of the tape, and talking with the police officers attorney as well as the older gentleman's attorney.

The police officers attorney sounded like a total sleaze bag. They'd show a clip (I was listening on the radio, so I wasn't actually seeing the clip) of apparently the police officers hitting the man in the back of the neck/head. And the attorney (for the police) had to make some statement like "well, we didn't see all of it", or "that's not what it looks like to me." Even though I wasn't watching it, it really sounded bad for that attorney. The victim's attorney sounded so much more convincing.

And this is all from someone that has no idea what either attorney looks like nor have I seen the whole "extended" video. (After listening to the commentary, I'd rather not watch the video).

[SeattleGirl]

6. I saw that piece with both attorneys.

The cops' attorney was just throwing things out all over the place, a common tactic. I know this because in my job, I deal with attorneys quite a bit. Most are pretty decent, and while their job is to be an advocate for their client, some of them push the envelop and interfere with what I am supposed to be doing. And then, it is the client who pays for it, not the attorney.

[MrMonk]

7. The police attorney was interviewed a day or so before that

when the only clips available showed the old man held against the wall, and, later, lying in his blood. The first clip clearly showed that the victim was hit in the face and repeatedly in the back of the head. The police attorney said flat out that the man was not being beaten in that clip. He later challenged the statement that the man had been bloodied by the cops: "You don't know where that blood came from." Yes, he's a sleaze.

On recollection: a day or so after this appeared on the news, the same attorney said the man's face was injured when one of the men in plain clothes (FBI?) "threw" the man to the ground. You can see on the long tape that a plain clothed man brought the old man to the ground, but protected the head while he did so. Then a cop moved in and punched the old man on the side of the face that turned out injured.

[SeattleGirl]

10. "You don't know where that blood came from."

WHAT? Does he think the man carried a container of blood with him to splash over himself and onto the sidewalk so the cops would look bad? Please!

I did hear the attorney say the cops were not hitting the guy. Hey, maybe the ATTORNEY was drunk when he watched the video clip!

[etherealtruth]

5. I too was very disgusted by the road that smarmy guy ...

... decided to take. I understand the need to vigorously defend a client ... The actions of his clients were despicable (though it really appears the victim did nothing "wrong" or illegal ... very few things would have justified the abuse by those officers----and I use the term loosely referring to the criminals that beat that man).

It is my hope all those witnessing the horrendous incident, including the Red Cross worker that this guy (for all intents and purposes) attacked (her character and honesty), will continue to come forward and share the (essentially) same story over and over.

I understand that the cops are stressed and would be willing to overlook some behavior --- but the vicious attack of an other human being: never.

[SeattleGirl]

9. Exactly -- these cops should be disciplined, at the very least.

I understand that the stress level for citizens and cops alike has got to be running very high, especially early on in the hurricane's aftermath, but that does not make it right, what these cops did to that man. And for the attorney to try to justify it makes me sick.

I believe in the right to a defense for everybody, but when defending turns into attacking another person's credibility for the sole purpose of making your client look "not so bad", I get disgusted. I realize it's standard operating procedure for many attorneys, but that doesn't make it okay.

[RagAss]

8. He's trying to save the city millions...

this is gonna go the settlement route.....20 million vs. 5 million...

That's the only question here...

[SeattleGirl]

12. Best way to save the city millions

is to get rid of cops who would act in this manner. In a confrontation between a citizen and a cop, the cop is not always right, and the citizen is not always wrong. Yep, people break the law, but so do cops. Not saying that it's more okay for a citizen to break the law, but it seems more disgusting to me when a law enforcement officer does it. Theya re supposed to be maintaining law and order, not taking advantage of their position.

[KamaAina]

32. Unless things have changed in the past 15 years,

the city of N.O. does not pay its legal judgments. Seriously. In my day, you could sue the city, and win -- and have them say, "Sorry. What're you gonna do, repossess Jackson Square?"

So it'd be $20 million vs. $5 million of Monopoly money, even when the city was still (barely) solvent. And now? It's anybody's guess.

[pitohui]

16. attorneys often seem like sleaze

but everyone has the right to a defense, that said, i agree w. yr interpretation of the tape -- esp. as it apparently is the case the older man was not drunk but suffers from parkinson's

i would hate to think any elder who suffers from this v. common illness is at risk of a beating from the police

[etherealtruth]

23. I don't even think that ...

... "attorneys often seem like sleaze," the ones I've known socially and the ones I've hired were as far from sleazy as one can be, however; the attorney for those cops could be the poster child for smarminess.

[SeattleGirl]

25. See my post #9 above

I am a very strong advocate of the right to a defense for people accused of wrongdoing or a flat out crime, even if it is captured on tape or they are caught with the proverbial (or literal) smoking gun in hand, if for no other reason than to make sure the wrongdoer is not drawn and quartered.

My beef is with attorney's who, instead of defending their clients, just attack anyone with a different take on a situation, or with evidence that shows their client is guilty. I guess that even though I do believe everyone has a right to a defense, if I were an attorney, I'd probably be a prosecutor instead of a defense attorney. I would not be willing to try to make a client appear innocent when all signs point to the opposite.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

24. The "he was drunk" thing is a red herring. Even if true it doesn't give

the cops an excuse to savagely beat someone.

They're just trying to tar this poor guy with something negative. For all we know maybe he just said something the cops didn't like and they decided to teach him a lesson. Now that the cops are caught, they need to give some kind of reason why they were even messing with him in the first place.

Again, even if he were totally intoxicated, where does it say that the police then dispense justice via savage beatings?