Buffalo PD assault older gentleman, leave him to bleed

[The Poojer]

Hey!!!!  That's my twitter post ?

 

18 hours ago, BornAgainBillsFan said:

 

Seriously? Peaceful protester???? Did you not see his Jun 3rd tweet provided earlier in this string?

 

 

That doesn't sound like he's all that peaceful toward the police. His twitter profile boasts that he's been arrested 4 times in the recent past, which suggests a history of incidents with the police. Which is not to say that this police force knew all that ahead of time.

 

My point is that we should have all the facts, if we're going to start making judgements about people's motives. Do your own research. Don't rely on media spin for your knowledge.

[The Dean]

3 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

I don't really appreciate your tone. "No level?" I slammed the cops in Minnesota in post after post. What should I do? Fly out there and kill them? They truly hurt a country and people will suffer. This both infuriates me and breaks my heart.

I am sorry if problems that you had over the course of your life did lead to less than pleasant interactions with police from around the country, and hope that you have turned things around now that you have advanced in age. If you make it to 75, maybe you can charge into a touch a few riot police officers during a pandemic. You will be "no threat" lol. Don't worry about social distancing, and try not to trip. 

 

 

 

Bill I have had both good, and bad, experiences with law enforcement over the years. In Niagara Falls, as a youth, I experienced your basic a$$holish cops. Many of the cops in NF were seemingly recruited from the detention halls of the local high schools. Bullies and punks who could now bully citizens with impunity (I can't speak for what it's like there now). But even then, it was just officers belligerently rousting us from playing football/baseball in a PUBLIC park, because a neighbor complained about noise. Instead of simply explaining the situation and asking us to move the game, they almost always approached with a negative threatening attitude, which can put a bad taste in one's mouth. 

 

OTOH, as I got older, I typically got away with things (even when I was doing something wrong) as my family was pretty well known and the officers typically knew my father, uncle, cousins, etc. Others, especially my Black friends, were not as lucky.

 

As I move around the country (Boston, SF, LA, NY and Long Island to name some) I had both positive and negative experiences with law enforcement. However, I tended to believe most officers were pretty good. I wasn't naive enough to believe there were only a "few bad apples" among LEOs, I still believed overall, they were responsible and decent. It's really hard to continue to believe that at the moment. The reason is I don't think blindly supporting and backing a fellow officer who clearly violates the principle of "protect and serve" is either responsible or decent. With that said, given a different culture I do believe most of these officers would act like decent and responsible humans. Unfortunately that culture is not in place in many, if not most, communities.

 

I was not aware you condemned the Minnesota officers, but good for you. It's a start. If I live to be 75 (seriously, don't take that bet) like this fellow, I won't CHARGE a police line---and neither did this poor old man. But hopefully by then, officers will be better trained and learn to use the minimum necessary force in any given situation.

 

And Bill, please stay safe. 

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, The Dean said:

 

 

Bill I have had both good, and bad, experiences with law enforcement over the years. In Niagara Falls, as a youth, I experienced your basic a$$holish cops. Many of the cops in NF were seemingly recruited from the detention halls of the local high schools. Bullies and punks who could now bully citizens with impunity (I can't speak for what it's like there now). But even then, it was just officers belligerently rousting us from playing football/baseball in a PUBLIC park, because a neighbor complained about noise. Instead of simply explaining the situation and asking us to move the game, they almost always approached with a negative threatening attitude, which can put a bad taste in one's mouth. 

 

OTOH, as I got older, I typically got away with things (even when I was doing something wrong) as my family was pretty well known and the officers typically knew my father, uncle, cousins, etc. Others, especially my Black friends, were not as lucky.

 

As I move around the country (Boston, SF, LA, NY and Long Island to name some) I had both positive and negative experiences with law enforcement. However, I tended to believe most officers were pretty good. I wasn't naive enough to believe there were only a "few bad apples" among LEOs, I still believed overall, they were responsible and decent. It's really hard to continue to believe that at the moment. The reason is I don't think blindly supporting and backing a fellow officer who clearly violates the principle of "protect and serve" is either responsible or decent. With that said, given a different culture I do believe most of these officers would act like decent and responsible humans. Unfortunately that culture is not in place in many, if not most, communities.

 

I was not aware you condemned the Minnesota officers, but good for you. It's a start. If I live to be 75 (seriously, don't take that bet) like this fellow, I won't CHARGE a police line---and neither did this poor old man. But hopefully by then, officers will be better trained and learn to use the minimum necessary force in any given situation.

 

And Bill, please stay safe. 

What do you think he was doing with his phone?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

I don't really appreciate your tone. "No level?" I slammed the cops in Minnesota in post after post. What should I do? Fly out there and kill them? They truly hurt a country and people will suffer. This both infuriates me and breaks my heart.

I am sorry if problems that you had over the course of your life did lead to less than pleasant interactions with police from around the country, and hope that you have turned things around now that you have advanced in age. If you make it to 75, maybe you can charge into a touch a few riot police officers during a pandemic. You will be "no threat" lol. Don't worry about social distancing, and try not to trip.

 

Bill, in all honesty, my reaction to the "he charged the police" as any kind of realistic or reasonable description of the video interaction was about the same as @The Dean's.  No, he did not do anything that a "reasonable man" would possibly construe as "charging" the police.  He walked towards the police line while they were still, and when the "Forward" order was given he kept walking.

 

I think it's a reasonable inference that he was bent on civil disobedience - his twitter feed makes it clear that he believes on principle curfews should not apply to protests and are a violation of the First Amendment. 

 

Let's just try to get to the root of a couple things and clarify them so we know where we stand.

 

Let's stipulate an unarmed citizen carrying a cell phone and a helmet that are both his property approaches police at a walk and apparently says something to them.  Are the police justified in shoving him with enough force that he falls over? 

Yes or no?

 

Step away from the "eeeeew Hapless wouldn't you be grossed out if he were touching you?" hypotheticals and just answer please.

[Bill from NYC]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Step away from the "eeeeew Hapless wouldn't you be grossed out if he were touching you?" hypotheticals and just answer please.

Why? Didn't you devote a thread, a signature, and countless posts signing the praises of social distancing?  That isn't hypothetical, it is fact.

MAYBE you think it is just fine for police officers to be physically accosted by radicals of a particular political persuasion. Notice I said "Maybe." I do not,  but I am also NOT glad that he fell and sustained injury. 

I do however think that if we give it our all, pull ourselves up from our bootstraps, and try to put this behind us, the world might just recover from the sad incident in Buffalo. 

This incident does NOT compare to the disgraceful, evil event in Minnesota, even if someone wants it to. 

 

EDIT: And btw, I do NOT know exactly what I would have done in that situation. There is little time to decide. I can tell you that I could have shot several people and been 100%justified and did not. Something inside told me that I had a little more time. I will not go into details. You probably don't understand and how could you, but; in some circumstances there are only seconds, if that, to make a decision. 

It also btw looked as if they were ordered by a superior officer to move along. Was the medical team in the rear? I don't know, do you? How long did he have to wait for medical attention? 

 

I really do think that all of us need more information, and that it will come out.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Bill from NYC

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Bill from NYC said:

Why? Didn't you devote a thread, a signature, and countless posts signing the praises of social distancing?  That isn't hypothetical, it is fact.

MAYBE you think it is just fine for police officers to be physically accosted by radicals of a particular political persuasion. Notice I said "Maybe." I do not,  but I am also NOT glad that he fell and sustained injury. 

I do however think that if we give it our all, pull ourselves up from our bootstraps, and try to put this behind us, the world might just recover from the sad incident in Buffalo. 

This incident does NOT compare to the disgraceful, evil event in Minnesota, even if someone wants it to. 

 

EDIT: And btw, I do NOT know exactly what I would have done in that situation. There is little time to decide. I can tell you that I could have shot several people and been 100%justified and did not. Something inside told me that I had a little more time. I will not go into details. You probably don't understand and how could you, but; in some circumstances there are only seconds, if that, to make a decision. 

It also btw looked as if they were ordered by a superior officer to move along. Was the medical team in the rear? I don't know, do you? How long did he have to wait for medical attention?

 

I really do think that all of us need more information, and that it will come out.

The person who was behind the officer who pushed the older fellow immediately called for medical help on his radio. That is clear from the tape. I'm not sure if he was a supervisor or not but he directed the pusher to continue to move forward. The optics of the police line continuing to move forward while the individual was lying on the ground was awful. But in my view he was quickly attended to. 

 

On this incident I have already stated my position. I don't believe that the officer/s should have been criminally charged. There was no intent to injure. That is not to say that they should have pushed this confronting older fellow because of his age and physical vulnerability. As I stated in prior posts this matter should have been handled internally as a police disciplinary and judgment issue.  

[K-9]

48 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The person who was behind the officer who pushed the older fellow immediately called for medical help on his radio. That is clear from the tape. I'm not sure if he was a supervisor or not but he directed the pusher to continue to move forward. The optics of the police line continuing to move forward while the individual was lying on the ground was awful. But in my view he was quickly attended to. 

 

On this incident I have already stated my position. I don't believe that the officer/s should have been criminally charged. There was no intent to injure. That is not to say that they should have pushed this confronting older fellow because of his age and physical vulnerability. As I stated in prior posts this matter should have been handled internally as a police disciplinary and judgment issue.  

Awful but lawful.
 

If Mr. Gugino were under 65, I don’t think the officers would have been charged as the DA specifically mentioned that age related NY statute. 

[JohnC]

13 hours ago, K-9 said:

Awful but lawful.
 

If Mr. Gugino were under 65, I don’t think the officers would have been charged as the DA specifically mentioned that age related NY statute. 

I saw the DA's press conference where he pointed out that because of the age of Mr. Gugino that the act fit all the elements of the particular law forcing him to charge. I strenuously disagree with his decision because even if all the elements of the transgressed statue are met what isn't met is the circumscribing element of intent. In my opinion there was no intent to hurt the individual and without question there was no criminal intent on the part of the officers. The law is not simply the law. The law also involves judgment and the notion of common sense. If you are driving 26 MPH in a 25 MPH zone technically there is a violation. But common sense dictates some leeway.  

 

It's obvious why this incident was elevated. It got caught up with the maelstrom of the Minnesota police murder. As I stated in a prior post what happens if this case goes to trial and the officers are acquitted or more likely there is a hung jury. Who benefits? The community is even more fractured and enflamed and the police are more embittered and feel under siege. Judgment and common sense go hand in hand in the application of the law. There was a better way to handle this optically problematic issue. In my judgment it should have been directed toward a fully transparent disciplinary proceeding within the police department. 

Edited June 14, 2020 by JohnC

[4merper4mer]

18 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Bill, in all honesty, my reaction to the "he charged the police" as any kind of realistic or reasonable description of the video interaction was about the same as @The Dean's.  No, he did not do anything that a "reasonable man" would possibly construe as "charging" the police.  He walked towards the police line while they were still, and when the "Forward" order was given he kept walking.

 

I think it's a reasonable inference that he was bent on civil disobedience - his twitter feed makes it clear that he believes on principle curfews should not apply to protests and are a violation of the First Amendment. 

 

Let's just try to get to the root of a couple things and clarify them so we know where we stand.

 

Let's stipulate an unarmed citizen carrying a cell phone and a helmet that are both his property approaches police at a walk and apparently says something to them.  Are the police justified in shoving him with enough force that he falls over? 

Yes or no?

 

Step away from the "eeeeew Hapless wouldn't you be grossed out if he were touching you?" hypotheticals and just answer please.

 

Why not be accurate if you're asking questions and holding Bill to standards of not using hypotheticals?

 

You categorize the guy as holding a "cell phone and a helmet".  It is 2020 so I'm sure you're aware that a "cell phone" is capable of lots of applications.  One of these applications is scanning police  communications devices for use in jamming and tracking these devices later.  There is video available clearly showing this commie waving the phone at two different cops and specific areas of their gear.  Why simply ignore that when trying to make your case?  Why call it a "cell phone"?

 

The guy got pushed and unfortunately had a bad fall.  There is nothing indicating the cop wanted him to fall, he wanted him to go away.  He probably should have detained him instead and looked at the phone app. Once the guy fell, by all accounts he was attended to quickly, albeit not by the first guy who leaned over him.

 

[Bill from NYC]

9 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

 

Why not be accurate if you're asking questions and holding Bill to standards of not using hypotheticals?

 

You categorize the guy as holding a "cell phone and a helmet".  It is 2020 so I'm sure you're aware that a "cell phone" is capable of lots of applications.  One of these applications is scanning police  communications devices for use in jamming and tracking these devices later.  There is video available clearly showing this commie waving the phone at two different cops and specific areas of their gear.  Why simply ignore that when trying to make your case?  Why call it a "cell phone"?

 

The guy got pushed and unfortunately had a bad fall.  There is nothing indicating the cop wanted him to fall, he wanted him to go away.  He probably should have detained him instead and looked at the phone app. Once the guy fell, by all accounts he was attended to quickly, albeit not by the first guy who leaned over him.

 

This is not to mention covid19.

[Bermuda Triangle]

Came across this earlier today:

 

 

 

Meanwhile, Chauvin will collect his pension even if he is convicted of Floyd's murder.  Sickening.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/buffalo-officials-ask-state-probe-firing-black-officer-who-stopped-n1231016

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by Bermuda Triangle

[4merper4mer]

9 minutes ago, Bermuda Triangle said:

Came across this earlier today:

 

 

 

Meanwhile, Chauvin will collect his pension even if he is convicted of Floyd's murder.  Sickening.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/buffalo-officials-ask-state-probe-firing-black-officer-who-stopped-n1231016

 

Lefties have always liked unions and tenures so really don't have any business complaining about the pensions.  The firing of the BPD officer is a different issue than the pensions.

[Bermuda Triangle]

FWIW, former BPD Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske was quoted as saying that the shove to Gugino was "pretty clearly" assault.

[Just Jack]

Has everyone forgotten that a helmet can be used as a weapon?

 

 

[Warcodered]

55 minutes ago, Just Jack said:

Has everyone forgotten that a helmet can be used as a weapon?

 

 

Generally you'd have to raise the helmet up to swing it, pretty hard to do much with it holding it down at your waist.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 6/13/2020 at 3:37 PM, Bill from NYC said:

Why? Didn't you devote a thread, a signature, and countless posts signing the praises of social distancing?  That isn't hypothetical, it is fact.

MAYBE you think it is just fine for police officers to be physically accosted by radicals of a particular political persuasion.

 

What I think, and have expressed very clearly in a previous post to you to which I did not see a response, is that these are police officers On the Job.

They are setting out to get physical with people as necessary in order to clear the square.  They need to be wearing whatever PPE gives them their desired level of protection to do the job and give them their best level of safety in close proximity to people.  If I recall, they were not wearing masks; I don't recall whether they were wearing gloves.  I seem to recall bare arms.  I haven't heard "Buffalo Police are not being issued appropriate PPE", maybe it's so, if so their union needs to raise holy hell.

 

I think if police officers have a job that involves laying hands on the public, they need to be prepared to have the public "physically accost" them. The officers need to "mind their own store" and mask up.  If I were still an EMT, and needed to be prepared to have people in my face and in my space, I would be prepared for it.

Given the above, no I don't think "OMG I've been physically accosted by an old guy getting near me" is cause to shove him and leave him with a concussion.

 

That's different than social distancing when it's an option, surely you see that?

 

On 6/13/2020 at 3:37 PM, Bill from NYC said:

Notice I said "Maybe." I do not,  but I am also NOT glad that he fell and sustained injury. 

 

I'm glad to hear that latter, but I would like to hear a direct answer to my question:

"Let's stipulate an unarmed citizen carrying a cell phone and a helmet that are both his property approaches police at a walk and apparently says something to them.  Are the police justified in shoving him with enough force that he falls over? 

Yes or no?  Just answer please.

 

On 6/13/2020 at 3:37 PM, Bill from NYC said:

It also btw looked as if they were ordered by a superior officer to move along. Was the medical team in the rear? I don't know, do you? How long did he have to wait for medical attention? 

 

 

I really do think that all of us need more information, and that it will come out.

 

The former is the reason I'm actually uncomfortable with the two being suspended and charged so quickly.  I think it's possible the two of them were following direct orders from their supervisor behind them and are now being "scapegoated".  I also saw the apparent supervisor key his lapel mic, and if he was calling for a medic, it's not necessarily inappropriate for them to move on and leave him for the medic though I would personally like to see an ABC check ASAP.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

Why not be accurate if you're asking questions and holding Bill to standards of not using hypotheticals?

 

You categorize the guy as holding a "cell phone and a helmet".  It is 2020 so I'm sure you're aware that a "cell phone" is capable of lots of applications.  One of these applications is scanning police  communications devices for use in jamming and tracking these devices later.  There is video available clearly showing this commie waving the phone at two different cops and specific areas of their gear.  Why simply ignore that when trying to make your case?  Why call it a "cell phone"?

 

The guy got pushed and unfortunately had a bad fall.  There is nothing indicating the cop wanted him to fall, he wanted him to go away.  He probably should have detained him instead and looked at the phone app. Once the guy fell, by all accounts he was attended to quickly, albeit not by the first guy who leaned over him.

 

I would like to see credible information to the effect that a cell phone on its own can somehow harvest information or jam police radios, period - or how somehow waving it near a radio would enable this?  I keep reading the same claim, but nowhere do I read anyone sourcing or backing up these claims.

 

I can download a police scanner app on my iphone or android - but I don't need to wave my phone around near police in order to enable this.  I just have to open the app.
 

People can purchase frequency blocking and jamming equipment that is illegal to own, but nonetheless available for a couple hundred bucks- but again, it doesn't look like an iphone, and it doesn't need to be waved near police radios to work or to work better.  To block frequencies, one tried and true method is to broadcast on the same frequency at higher power - something a cell phone is NOT designed to do.

 

2 hours ago, Warcodered said:

Generally you'd have to raise the helmet up to swing it, pretty hard to do much with it holding it down at your waist.

 

Not to mention the issue pictured was swinging a helmet against another player's bare head.

 

The officers in question were wearing helmets of their own and face shields.

[The Dean]

I'll try to make this my last comment here, but one more thought occurs to me. Perhaps it has been mentioned by others, if so I missed it.

 

Aren't officers trained to de-escalate in these kinds of situations? I thought that, unless they were in in real apparent danger, they were taught to diffuse tensions when there was limited risk. Perhaps I am mistaken on this. Maybe it isn't a universal principle of police work.  Because I see no attempt to de-escalate here from any officer, before the old man was shoved (pushed/whatever). 

 

I applaud and appreciate those officers and even police chiefs who chose to communicate with the protesters on a human level. Some even knelt and marched with the crowd. I'm curious to know how much violence and looting there was when the authorities took that approach, instead of the strictly domination-centered route. Is there any data available on this?

 

 

[4merper4mer]

58 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I would like to see credible information to the effect that a cell phone on its own can somehow harvest information or jam police radios, period - or how somehow waving it near a radio would enable this?  I keep reading the same claim, but nowhere do I read anyone sourcing or backing up these claims.

 

I can download a police scanner app on my iphone or android - but I don't need to wave my phone around near police in order to enable this.  I just have to open the app.
 

People can purchase frequency blocking and jamming equipment that is illegal to own, but nonetheless available for a couple hundred bucks- but again, it doesn't look like an iphone, and it doesn't need to be waved near police radios to work or to work better.  To block frequencies, one tried and true method is to broadcast on the same frequency at higher power - something a cell phone is NOT designed to do.

 

 

Not to mention the issue pictured was swinging a helmet against another player's bare head.

 

The officers in question were wearing helmets of their own and face shields.

Do you concur that he was waving his phone toward the police in a fashion similar to the way Dr. McCoy waved his magic medical device on Star Trek?  What might be the purpose of this.

 

What I've read is that the devices can pick  up frequencies being used by the police devices so they can be jammed by other means.  This makes sense to me but I'm not an EE.  What doesn't make sense is waving the phone around toward specific areas of the cops gear for no reason at all.  Apparently that makes sense to you.

[Bad Things]

9 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Do you concur that he was waving his phone toward the police in a fashion similar to the way Dr. McCoy waved his magic medical device on Star Trek?  What might be the purpose of this.

 

You're goofy.