Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Justified Anger or Brazen Intimidation? A heated confrontation inside a government office has become the talk of Odisha's political and administrative circles. BJP leader and actor Arindam Roy clashed sharply with a senior officer (ABDO), and the viral video is now fuelling a bigger question. Was this a legitimate...

22,373 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

A teen who was assaulted and slammed by a Warren police officer during booking has filed a $50 million lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed this week by Fieger Law. Matthew Rodriguez, 48, an officer with 14 years on the force, was charged Friday with assault and battery charges. Warren police announced Monday that he had been fired According to the lawsuit, the teen suffered physical and mental damage due to excessive force, and the city of Warren failed to properly train the officer. "Officer Matthew, with the specific intent to intimidate and/or harass Plaintiff, as a result of his race and/or ethnicity, caused physical contact with Plaintiff by striking him in the head and/or face with a fist and pulling him off the ground by his hair," the lawsuit reads. The lawsuit also says that the two other officers in the video failed to intervene and help the teen. “This is one of the most flagrant cases of police misconduct I’ve seen in my entire career as a trial attorney. The sheer violence and disregard for human life that these three officers showed is despicable and cannot be tolerated," said James Harrington of Fieger Law. The incident happened early this week at the Warren police department. The video shows the officer punching and grabbing the 19-year-old by his locs before slamming & launching him into his cell. Warren Police Commissioner Bill Dwyer says an investigation was launched after the two officers in the video stepped up and told a supervisor about the incident. One officer was telling Rodriguez "That's enough" multiple times in an attempt to make the officer stop, Dwyer said. At first, they did not know why the officer was attacking him. Within a week, the officer was arrested, charged, and put on unpaid administrative leave, said Dwyer. The officer in the video also was out of policy and was not wearing bodycam. The officer has a lengthy history of alleged accessive force. He currently has two pending lawsuits.

Music is Life

1,891,820 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

This dad called 911 because his seven year old autistic son wasn’t behaving and was having a tantrum. The officer that spoke with him told the father that it was completely inappropriate to call the police over this. He said they have an entire town to protect and three officers responded and then asks the dad while chuckling - “can’t handle a seven year old?” The dad tells him that he has called 911 twice before but no one has ever got mad at him like this officer. The officer tells him that they are approaching charging him with false summoning a police officer. He also tells him that if he can’t handle a seven year then maybe they should get CYS involved because clearly the dad needs parenting classes. 😳 Many said the officer was rude and didn’t have to be. That his job is to protect and SERVE the community and that the family was just reaching out, that he needed support and someone to to talk to because they have no idea how hard it is to raise an autistic child? But others said this is not a job for a police officer, that they aren’t counselors and therapists and that there are many resources available through the city that he should using. 💯 I am team police officer. Some may find it rude but this is not in their job description. And being the third time? You have to put a stop to the 911 calls. What do you think? Do you think the officer had a right to be upset and talk the way he was talking to the dad being that this is the third time this has happened? Or, do you think he should have had more compassion for the father?

👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈

26,693 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

This dude unloads on cop in a who is in the right type situation. We are in Adam's county PA where a Law Enforcement Ranger pulls over a man because he is saying he could not see his tag. By the officers own admission he was able to see the tag as he got closer but proceeded with the stop. As per usual the officer asks for ID and the man in truck went to work on this officer telling him this is an illegal stop as no crime has been committed so he is not required to provide ID. Through out the interaction he asks the officer if he is free to go and the officer doubles down on detainment. However at the same time when asked the officer was not able to articulate a crime. The man also asked for a sergeant and the officer never compiled by getting a supervisor on scene which honestly would have been the best move. There are two ways to look at this interaction. The eyes of the officer: The officer calmly maintains that the traffic stop is entirely lawful. In the United States, law enforcement needs reasonable suspicion to initiate a traffic stop. An obscured license plate or illegally dark window tint satisfies that standard in almost every jurisdiction. Furthermore, once a lawful traffic stop is initiated, a driver is legally required to produce a valid driver's license, proof of insurance, and vehicle registration. The driver's perspective: The driver claims that his tags are legit and the officer was able to see that when he ran them. He argues that because the ranger claimed at first he could not see the tags but now he can as he approached the vehicle. Since the officer admitted he can now see the tags and there is no problem with the tags, the initial stop was "erroneous" and constitutes an illegal search and seizure. He also details a personal grievance with local law enforcement, claiming a local district attorney and police officers have been "terrorizing" him. What is your take on this stop? Was this a case of an officer error where with the cop trying to save face by digging for a reason for the stop, or was this a legal stop and this officer deserves praise for staying calm while dealing with this man's outbursts? Share your thoughts below.

Giggling Ganon

194,059 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

This video of the government-owned boat that sank in Lake Kariba, killing tens of people, is a reflection of Zimbabwe’s public infrastructure, which has been destroyed by incompetence, nepotism and, more importantly, corruption. The video shows how the boat was allowed to pack passengers like sardines, how those left on land talked about how the idea of the journey was a bad idea and how the end started to unfold. This is a 43-year-old boat owned by a government agency. It is battered and clearly in a terrible state. Nowhere in a functional country would a boat in this condition be allowed to carry passengers, let alone 153 people when it was supposed to carry a maximum of 45. This is negligence of the highest order. The government has sent these people to their deaths, and it must take full responsibility. Again, in a normal country, and I hope that in this respect Zimbabwe can be a normal country, there would be lawyers willing to take up pro bono cases against the government on behalf of the families of those who died. When you have a government agency operating such a battered boat, no government authority stopping it from being used, and apparently no effective system ensuring that basic passenger and safety limits are respected, then the state has catastrophically failed to discharge its duty to protect citizens. This avoidable accident has now been declared a national disaster, but declaring it a national disaster does not bring these people back. It does not answer the fundamental questions about how this was allowed to happen. Who inspected this boat? Who certified it as safe to carry passengers? Who was responsible for enforcing its maximum passenger capacity? How could a boat meant to carry no more than 45 people end up carrying 153 without being stopped by anyone? Who knew about its condition, and what did they do about it? This tragedy must be used not only to hold those responsible accountable, but also to make sure that something like this never happens again. There must be an independent investigation, and its findings must be made public. Those whose negligence contributed to these deaths must face consequences, regardless of their positions or political connections. In a normal country, the Minister of Transport should have resigned before the end of today. Let us not forget that RIDA falls under the President’s office, while the Transport ministry has responsibility for the regulatory framework governing the transportation of people and public safety. But we all know that in Zimbabwe, ministers are too often not appointed on account of their competence. They are appointed on account of political loyalty and how much they are willing to bootlick the President. When competence, accountability and professionalism are replaced by patronage, this is the result you end up with. Disaster! These were human beings whose families expected them to come home. Declaring a national disaster and issuing condolences are not enough. There must be accountability, there must be justice for the victims and their families, and there must be fundamental changes to ensure that Zimbabweans are never again sent to their deaths because those entrusted with protecting them failed to do their jobs. The fact that nobody has resigned simply shows how Zimbabwe is not a Banana Republic.

Hopewell Chin’ono

32,461 Aufrufe • vor 17 Tagen