Title: Disturbing Video Shows a Cop Brutally Beat a Child for Riding Her Bike, Charges HER with Assualt Source:
Free Thought Project URL Source:http://thefreethoughtproject.com/co ... -riding-bike-mall-parking-lot/ Published:May 14, 2016 Author:Matt Agorist Post Date:2016-05-14 12:42:40 by Deckard Keywords:None Views:29405 Comments:194
Tacoma, WA — On May 24, 2014, 15-year-old Monique Tillman and her brother were riding their bikes when they were stopped and this young girl brutally assaulted by Tacoma Police Officer Jared Williams.
Tillman and her brother had done nothing wrong, and were merely targetted by this ‘public servant’ because they had the unfortunate luck to have crossed paths with him.
As the duo travelled home, they cut through a mall parking lot, as they had done countless times before. However, this time, Officer Williams was in that parking lot, in his full Tacoma Police department uniform, yet off-duty, working as mall security. As the teens travelled through the lot, Williams began pursuit of these hardened criminals and accused them of trespassing.
Knowing they’d done nothing wrong, Monique attempted to explain to the officer that they cut through the parking lot all the time on their way home. However, this tyrant was having nothing of it.
As the duo attempted to ride away from a man whose intentions were clearly unscrupulous, Williams attacked. A recently released surveillance video shows the disturbing scene that unfolded next.
This heroic officer ripped the girl from her bike and slammed her up against a parked car with his hand around her neck. As the child struggled to breathe, this abusive tyrant grabbed her by the hair and flung her around like a rag doll.
Clearly overpowering the small child, half his size, the officer wasn’t satisfied with the damage he’d inflicted so far. So, for good measure, Williams pulled out his taser and sent 50,000 volts into this poor girl.
“He was choking me, grabbed me by my hair and tried to slam my face into the concrete. The next thing I know, I’m on the ground being tased,” Tillman said.
Now face down, tasered, handcuffed and brutalized, Williams stood over his victim like a hunter and his kill. He had protected society from the likes of a dangerous brother and sister riding their bicycles.
Williams then arrested Monique and charged her with resisting arrest and, get this, assault on an officer.
After viewing the surveillance video of the incident, however, all of the charges were thrown out.
Vito de la Cruz, Tillman’s attorney, has filed a lawsuit seeking damages from Officer Williams, the Simon Property Group who owns the Tacoma Mall and Universal Protection Services, the private security company in charge of Tacoma Mall security.
“A child riding a bike should not have to worry that a police officer will stop her without legal cause and brutalize her,” said de la Cruz. “Our communities are weary of another African American child being hurt by unwarranted and excessive police force.”
The Free Thought Project reached out the Tacoma PD to inquire about Williams’ current status and if any disciplinary action had been taken. However, our requests for comment were not returned.
Below is what policing in modern day America has become.
Ok,just watched the video and need to point out two things. The girl CLEARLY was trying to ride away on her bicycle when he first grabbed her,and she was CLEARLY resisting arrest when he started tossing her around,choking her,and tasing her.
The most important thing to point out is that HE HAD NO AUTHORITY TO STOP HER TO START WITH. A shopping center parking lot is by definition public property,and he has no legal or moral authority to stop anyone from entering it at any time of the day or night.
Which nullifies the first point about her resisting arrest. He had no right to stop or try to arrest her,so she can't be charged with resisting an illegal arrest.
Officer Cartman was just having one of those "You WILL respect my authoritay!" moments. SOB should be fired and sued by both the city and the girls parents.
The girl CLEARLY was trying to ride away on her bicycle
Trying - maybe.
She got about a foot away before the "hero" sprung into action, saving the day from these hardened criminals.
HE HAD NO AUTHORITY TO STOP HER TO START WITH. A shopping center parking lot is by definition public property
That is my understanding as well, and since the kids had apparently done this on a number of occasions, it seems like the cop saw a opportunity to flex his authority on a couple of innocent kids.
What, you don't expect him to actually go after real criminals, do you?
A shopping center parking lot is by definition public property
By whose definition ... yours?
A shopping center parking lot is public property only is it is government owned.
If the shopping center parking lot is privately owned, then it is private property.
You will need to show me why a security guard hired by the private property owners cannot stop someone in the privately owned parking lot ... do so, please.
A shopping center parking lot is by definition public property By whose definition ... yours? By any sane definition known to man. Or do the words "open to the public" confuse you?
Sure I do.
Open to the Public - A shopping center lot is not a public parking lot if it's a privately owned parking lot belonging to the owner of the shopping mall. The people leasing the property or the owners of the property can tow you if you don't park according to their wishes. The privately owned parking lots at the shopping malls are “open to the public” to provide a great service by allowing us access to retail and office centers. The owners or management controls access to a privately owned shopping center parking lot “open to the public.” In Cincinnati recently private event club transitioned to a cocktail bar and lounge that’s “open to the public.” While it is “open to the public,” the management or owners can have you leave if there is sufficient reason to. “Open to the public” does not mean it is public property, that the public can have access anytime they desire or do anything the want to. It is still private property if it is privately owned or owned by a corporation and they control the “dos and don'ts.”
Public property - Property owned by the government or one of its agencies, divisions, or entities. Commonly a reference to parks, playgrounds, streets, sidewalks, schools, libraries and other property regularly used by the general public.
Private property - Land not owned by the government or dedicated to public use.
Public Use - the only purpose for which private property can be taken (condemned) by the government under its power of eminent domain. Public use includes: schools, streets, highways, hospitals, government buildings, parks, water reservoirs, flood control, slum clearance and redevelopment, public housing, public theaters and stadiums, safety facilities, harbors, bridges, railroads, airports, terminals, prisons, jails, public utilities, canals, and numerous other purposes designated as beneficial to the public.
Dedication - The giving of land by a private person or entity to the government, typically for a street, park or school site, as part of and a condition of a real estate development. The local county or city (or other public body) must accept the dedication before it is complete. In many cases there are "dedicated" streets on old subdivision maps which were never officially accepted and, in effect, belong to no one. The adjoining property owners can sue for a judgment to give them the title to the unclaimed (unowned) street or property (quiet title action) or request abandonment by the government which did not accept the street or other property.
Open to the Public - A shopping center lot is not a public parking lot if it's a privately owned parking lot belonging to the owner of the shopping mall. The people leasing the property or the owners of the property can tow you if you don't park according to their wishes. The privately owned parking lots at the shopping malls are “open to the public” to provide a great service by allowing us access to retail and office centers. The owners or management controls access to a privately owned shopping center parking lot “open to the public.” In Cincinnati recently private event club transitioned to a cocktail bar and lounge that’s “open to the public.” While it is “open to the public,” the management or owners can have you leave if there is sufficient reason to. “Open to the public” does not mean it is public property, that the public can have access anytime they desire or do anything the want to. It is still private property if it is privately owned or owned by a corporation and they control the “dos and don'ts.”
Blah,blah,blah. You are more full of shit than a Thanksgiving turkey.
There is no lie you won't tell and no truth you won't stretch to the limits in order to provide excuses for cowardly thugs with badges.
HOW were the mall owners going to call tow trucks to tow off the kids bicycles that were just traveling THROUGH the parking lot?
More importantly,the trouble started with the mall employee,a thug with a badge,stopped the kids TO KEEP THEM FROM LEAVING.
Are you now claiming mall owners have a right to imprison people passing through?
A mall parking lot IS public property,and the only time the public is forbidden access to that property is when those INDIVIDUALS have broken some of the rules and management has told them to leave. The kids were ALREADY leaving,you idiot. It was the mall employees that kept them there.
A mall parking lot IS public property,and the only time the public is forbidden access to that property is when those INDIVIDUALS have broken some of the rules and management has told them to leave.
Blah,blah,blah. You are more full of shit than a Thanksgiving turkey.
The shopping mall parking lot is NOT public property, if it is privately owned.
You can't loose an online debate gracefully and admit that you are wrong,
How can I be the one that is wrong,when it is you and your posse that are defending a full-grown cop (I won't use the word "man")throwing a unarmed skinny 15 year old girl to the pavement and then tazing her?
How can I be the one that is wrong,when it is you and your posse that are defending a full-grown cop (I won't use the word "man")throwing a unarmed skinny 15 year old girl to the pavement and then tazing her?
Because, as you have repeatedly shown, you are a fucking idiot. The yoot did not seem amenable to counseling.
Stinky Peter Puff is sympathetic towards fags, criminal activity and drug addicts... just like the others that post and defend each other. Who else defends criminals, drug use and fags? The Dimrats.
Stinky Peter Puff is sympathetic towards fags, criminal activity and drug addicts... just like the others that post and defend each other. Who else defends criminals, drug use and fags? The Dimrats.
Stinky Peter is just another of those who knows nothing of the law, but loves to go on and on about his expertise. When he is proven absolutely wrong, he then bring out his ultmate argument that the other party is a nazi, an asshole, a statist, etc. etc.
More like a whore, when the argument gets to be too much, Deckard starts a new thread and uses it like a new corner where he starts all over as a virgin.
Stinky Peter is just another of those who knows nothing of the law, but loves to go on and on about his expertise.
Nolu Chan is just another of those who claims vast knowledge of how our law MUST be applied (disregarding Constitutional restraints) and loves to go on and on about his erroneous expertise.
Why is it that you pro drug addict posters feel the need to fight each other's battles? Is it because you are all too much of a pussy to do it yourself?
When we pick on the faggot lover Pete or the career criminal lover Deckard, does it make you sad? You need a tissue?
Why is it that you pro drug addict posters feel the need to fight each other's battles? Is it because you are all too much of a pussy to do it yourself?
He has an overwhelming and instinctual response need to be right, to be the victor. He likes to argue. If no one is arguing with him, he then seeks out arguments between other to join in.
There is an old proverb that states, “If you’re arguing with someone for more than five minutes, chances are it’s not about them or their actions. It’s about you.” That expresses effectively some commonplace truth or useful thought far above his comprehension level.
