LF: 'This is my vehicle, sir': Shocking moment black Northwestern University PhD student is beaten and cuffed when cops refuse to believe he owns the Chevy he's driving

Title: 'This is my vehicle, sir': Shocking moment black Northwestern University PhD student is beaten and cuffed when cops refuse to believe he owns the Chevy he's driving
Source: Daily Mail Online
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... e-believe-car-driving-his.html
Published: Jan 15, 2017
Author: Emily Crane
Post Date: 2017-01-15 07:32:06 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 11579
Comments: 38

This is the shocking moment a black Northwestern University PhD student was tackled to the ground when police thought he'd stolen the car he was driving.

Lawrence Crosby is now suing the Evanston Police Department for excessive force and false arrest following his confrontation in Chicago in October 2015.

Authorities released dashboard video recordings on Wednesday of the moment Crosby, then 25, was pulled over for a traffic stop and subsequently beaten and cuffed.

The video also included audio of the 911 call made by a woman who thought Crosby was trying to break into a vehicle, which sparked the series of events.

Police released dashboard video recordings this week of the moment Lawrence Crosby, then 25, was tackled to the ground in Evanston, Chicago in 2015 after they refused to believe he owned the car he was driving

Footage shows police signalling for Crosby to stop in the 1500 block of Ridge Avenue in Evanston about 7pm on October 10, 2015.

He can be seen getting out of his Chevrolet with his arms in the air before telling officers he owns the vehicle.

A number of officers shouted at Crosby as they approached him with their guns drawn, before wrestling him to the ground.

Crosby, who was studying for his doctoral degree in civil engineering, repeatedly told the officers he owned the car and had the documentation to prove it.

He also tried to tell them he was fixing a piece of loose molding on the top of his car when the woman spotted him and mistakenly thought he was trying to steal it.

When police eventually realized Crosby did own the car, the student was charged with disobeying officers. The charged were later dropped in March 2016.

The 25-year-old Northwestern University PhD student repeatedly told the officers he owned the car and had the documentation to prove it as they wrestled him to the ground

When police eventually realized Crosby did own the car, the student was charged with disobeying officers. The charged were later dropped in March 2016

Crosby filed a civil lawsuit last year against the city and arresting officers. The footage was released after an alderman's request at an Evanston City Council meeting last week, the Chicago Tribune reports.

Police justified the actions of the arresting officers saying they thought they were responding to an auto theft.

Evanston Police spokesman Joseph Dugan said the officers delivered knee strikes and open-handed strikes like they had been trained.

'He was not injured, no bruises, his face was fine,' Dugan said.

'The use of force is justified,' he said. 'They had to make a decision with what they had at the time.'

Footage shows police following Crosby in Evanston in 2015 after a woman called 911 to report she saw a black man trying to break into a car

He was inconvenienced and his life was put at risk. He will now be paid a nice tidy sum by Evanston for his trouble. That's how we clean up this sort of thing. Since we don't believe we can properly stop the behavior, we pay afterwards for the mistakes. If he were killed, same thing, just a lot more money.

There is an easy fix to this sort of behaviour, don't let black people drive cars, the police would then be forced to target other behaviour or do the job they are paid to do. the number of arresting officers in this case is rediculous. Four big men to take down a skinny black guy????????????? Is this how cops get their kicks? the person who reported him should be sued for public nuiance and deformation

But many have stated publicly that by exiting his vehicle without permission, he brought it all upon himself and that the police reaction was warranted here in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

First you can't spell. The number of officers isn't ridiculous. You don't go one one one. That would be stupid.

We should all have a checklist on a little card in our vehicles at all times so that we can follow best practices when stopped.

Absent that the average citizen can be expected to react any number of ways when apprehended behind the wheel for specious reasons.

The guy jumped out the car with his hands in the air with his ID visible. He was subjected to contradictory orders brayed at him by a crowd of LEO's. He was then subject to The Blitz by half a dozen cops that was A) unprofessional, B) unnecessary and C) damaging to the public's perception of law enforcement.

If I were a police officer, I wouldn't relish having to defend such actions before a jury.

If I were him, I would view this as an economic opportunity and sue them for a lot.

no this time they went one one one one, what is stupid is that you should focus on spelling not the issue, I spell as I speak, but I don't live in a racially charged society where a black man is automatically a criminal and where people tend to mind everyone's business Why would the police assume the report of some old busybody is the truth? Why would more than one car respond? I'll tell you racism

At the 0:35 mark, the student should have just stayed in the car with his id and registration ready and his hands on the steering wheel with rolled down window and waited for the cops to approach his window. Instead he voluntary gets out of the vehicle possibly endangering himself.

At the 0:41 mark instead of the cops approaching with caution and asking to see id (license and registration), like a real seasoned officer would have done, they all run and attack him tackling him to the ground before ever asking for any identification at all. These cops needs to go back to basic training on approaching all suspects in vehicles. They are disgusting and an embarrassment to the police academy and department.

That happened to me last year when I had a headlight out heading to work. I had no idea that I had defective equipment as I had two good headlights when I parked my car the previous evening. My left headlamp must just have failed so I was confused as to the reason for the traffic stop. I'd pulled out on a side road for the officer wondering, "What the hell?" and I jumped out of the car without thinking. It had been years since I'd been stopped. The officer said, "Please remain in your car sir." I complied and got a warning.

Many of us are not pro's at encounters with LE and do stuff out of confusion. The guy in the vid had his ID in his hand, and I'm thinking that getting out of the car was his way of being compliant.

Good practice in the the Evanston stop would have been for the senior cop on location to have asked the young man to stay in his car with his hands on the wheel. A half dozen armed guys yelling one thing and another evidently freaked the kid out. Bad command and control. Bad practices. I'm sure these officers had training that should have been followed here. I suspect the problem is attitude. Too much gung ho in these guys.

of course it wasn't justified, what you have is a confused suspect, on his lawful occasion, surrounded by police.

As I said earlier, the person reporting this alleged crime should be changed with public nuiance and sued for deformation

He's got a billion candlepower focused on him and a crowd of cops hollering at him.

I don't agree with the cops here. I just don't agree that the police when responding shouldn't use overwhelming force. Meaning more then one on one.

Of course coming from bluelivesmatter.com they want to twist the story to state that the suspect resisted arrest when from the very start he had fully complied by keeping his hands up and there was no weapon ever found on him.

And this statement here "In a review of the situation it was determined that all of the officers acted lawfully and within policy, but backlash has forced change." tells me that they did a "cya" so as to make themselves not liable. They admitted from the very beginning that the suspect complied with keeping his hands up and now they want to switch their story. From the video that I first mentioned, I did not see the suspect resisting anybody. So why would those same officers who made the claim of the suspect resisting arrest charges now want to change their policy? What they actually did is change their story and hoped that the Internal Affairs Dept covered their behinds.

It appears the policy is the circumstance was to have the suspect get on the ground.

Especially, suspicious activity by family members should be reported to the state.

While at the same time being told hands up. Lights in your face. You can't necessarily react that fast.

The alliance between the police and the conservative right is snapping, one band at a time, because of efforts by the police to justify every single unjustifiably violent bullshit excess they commit.

We hired a bunch of combat veterans because they are well-trained and used to discipline, but we didn't deprogram the "I'm in a war zone and all of these people are potential hostiles" mindset that Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans have.

The Army is not there to SERVE the Afghani or Iraqi public, but the US President's orders. They are there to protect THEMSELVES while carrying out that mission.

But the police are there to protect and to serve the public. That's why the public hires them and tolerates the taxation to pay their taxes. It's why the public generally supports the police, and allows the cops SOME slack in carrying out what can be difficult duty in dealing with the scumbags of our society.

BUT when the police start to ROUTINELY treat the public they serve as a threat - when they default to their war training and think of themselves as patrolling hostiles, and act that way - well, that's not why we hire them and pay them.

It has become a bad enough problem, visible enough, that people's attitudes are changing about the police. The benefit of the doubt is being lost. As that accelerates, juries will stop protecting the police, and prosecutors, who are often elected, will favor the public.

The police are in for a rough time in the years ahead if they don't exercise much greater self-control and self-discipline. We're not a people under occupation. The police are there to protect and to serve US. They are failing at that job, more and more, thinking of themselves as Rangers on patrol in Iraq. That's going to lead to police joblessness and prosecution, and political retaliation by the public.

Right now, we're seeing Trump preparing to manhandle the intelligence services of the United States and make it very clear to them, before the world, that they are guard dogs who SERVE the President, not RULE his decisions.

In short: the police, right now, have been given the deference to determine what THEY think is reasonable response to police commands, to dealing with the public. They are abusing that discretion, and are going to see it stripped from them, and start seeing themselves held personally accountable for behaving like 'roid ragin' jackasses.

What happened to this kid is indefensible. It's over the top. The police may have followed their procedures, but their procedures need to be subject to political control by the public. The police cannot be permitted, in their discretion, to behave that way. They have to expose themselves to more risk in order to deal more reasonably with the public for whom they work, and whom they serve.

If they are too frightened to deal with the public that is on its feet instead of supine, they do not have the character or courage to be policemen, and should return to military service abroad. We're not going to permit the police to turn into Redcoats on their own authority.

You see the opposition building even here on this right wing website. People who, five years ago, three years ago, would have always taken the side of the police are losing faith, because the police are acting too aggressively.

Yeah! What's wrong with that? Isn't that what you're supposed to do when you're pulled over?

"He was then subject to The Blitz by half a dozen cops that was ... unnecessary"

He's lucky he wasn't shot. What triggered "The Blitz" was (according to the video) the fact that he ignored the officer's orders then turned away, reaching to his waist with his right hand.

We have certainly militarized the police in any case, with massive hiring and transfer of military equipment.

The police forces are starting to act like an army in occupation. They need to knock that off.

I will say this: I am glad these officers got home safe that night. You never know in these sorts of situations.

It just seems to me that there was no one in command of this situation and that led to panic on both sides. The bellowing and screaming were amateur hour.

It's human nature to be somewhat reluctant to get down on the ground especially when it's wet and grimy out.

They had the drop on him. "Put your hands on top the car" or "Keep your hands in the air, turn around and back up slowly" might have done the job. I've watched operations like this and these tactics seem to work reasonably well.

I watched and listened to the video and all I heard was "Get on the ground". All the cops were saying "Get on the ground". Did you hear anything different?"

You tell me. With all these cops pointing guns at him and yelling for him to get on the ground ... why did he refuse a lawful and reasonable command from uniformed police?

I did not hear them tell him to get on the ground. All I saw was him holding up his hands and it appeared he had something in one of those hands but it turned out not to be a weapon but perhaps identification. At the same time that he was standing with his hands up and not resisting, they all bum rushed him and knocked him down. They never gave him time to get down on on the ground. They just rushed after him and tackled him down to the ground like he was some wild animal out of control. The way they handled this matter would be best described as gross criminal misconduct.

I would not. I would say that the police here are clearly, without any reasonable doubt, completely out of control. The city should be sued for their misconduct, and forced to pay large sums to this man.

Police who do not treat a suspected car theif as dangerous put their own life, and that of others, at risk.

People who are pulled over and get out of their car and approach the police, and who do not follow commands, endnager their own life.

We all know the drill. Stay in the care, put your hands on the wheel in plain sight, and await and follow instructions.

That the liberals have been voted out of office at the Federal and State levels, speaks to the public will.

Getting out of the car and approaching the police is most certainly not an order ever given by the police. Stay in the vehicle, engine off, hands on the wheel in clear view, and await and follow instructions.

It appears they followed established procedure (which procedure you are free to disagree with) and they therefore have qualified immunity.

Yes, it's really that simple. Some people have lived their entire lives never complying with authority. Street cops are often the first people to demand they do so.

Qualified Immunity does not apply to police officers acting outside the scope of their duties. Was it within the scope of their duties to rush at and push down to the ground and begin hitting at the suspect when they already had decided he posed no threat to them? No, it was not within the scope of their duties. What they did was use their badge of authority to brazenly attack an unarmed suspect who had fully complied from the start to surrender. The officers even admitted this themselves. So, with that being said, if those officers were so damn sure about their actions being legal, why did they go and change their policy procedure?

This assertion is just patently false. It is blatantly apparent that he did not comply with the police. The police never instruct the suspect to put something in his hand, exit the vehicle, and come toward them.

When stopping a suspected fleeing hi-risk person, it is standard to order that person to the ground. If the suspect fails or refused to comply, it is standard to put the suspect on the ground, using such force as necessary to overcome resistance. Discussiong follows after the high-risk threat of violence is eliminated.

True. However, it was within the scope of their duties to put the high-risk suspect on the ground, and to use such force as necessary to overcome his resistance.

I am not a mind reader. I suspect you lack such superpowers as well. Your assertion that the officers "already had decided he posed no threat to them," requires such superpower to read their minds.

It was within the scope of their duties to put the high-risk suspect on the ground and eliminate the perceived threat. It is not a negotiation process. The goal is to establish complete control of the scene, eliminating the perceived threat to themselves or others. The question is whether the police acted within established policy for a high-risk stop of a suspected fleeing felon.

If the officers acted pursuant to established policy, limited immunity inheres. This is true even if compliance with the policy results in an unlawful act. In such case, the qualified immunity protects the officers and any suit must be brought against the employing agency. The vast majority of such cases are brought against an employing city or county or agency. If the object is to sue for big bucks, suing the individual cops is self-defeating. Suing a defendant with deep pockets is the way to go.

Hitting somebody who’s resisting arrest can get them to loosen up enough to be handcuffed

The only think you and I can agree on here is that the suspect should have stayed in the car and let the officers approach him and ask for id.

You are entitled to your opinion. He did not follow standard procedure, and he did not comply with instructions to get on the ground. Crosby admitted he walked toward the front of his vehicle "because he wanted the incident to be cuaght on his vehicle's dash cam video."

If he did not comply with standard policy procedure to get on the ground, then why after all the commotion that took place with them wrestling him to the ground, did they decide to get rid of their policy concerning this very procedure?

It is irrelevant why they changed the policy. What is relevant is the policy that was in effect at the time of the event.

“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.