Oklahoma cop proves to be a liar after dash cam is released (sign petition to get him fired)

June 13th, 2009 · 184 Comments

Update: PINAC reader Theo put together a petition calling for the termination of Oklahoma State Trooper Daniel Martin. For whatever it’s worth, we will send it to Oklahoma Highway Patrol Chief, Colonel Van M. Guillotte,

By Carlos Miller
The fact that they have not stripped Daniel Martin of his badge and gun is a crime in itself.

The dash cam video not only reveals that he falsified a police report – which has landed other cops in jail – but that he is about as insecure and unstable as a three-year-old child.

First of all, he had absolutely no reason to be speeding with his sirens wailing. All he was doing was picking up his wife at what appears to be a police station.

Then, after he picked up his wife, he pulls the ambulance over for failing to yield in what essentially was a non-emergency situation. In fact, the only vehicle that had an emergency on its hands was the ambulance, which was transporting a patient to the hospital.

And after the ambulance pulls over, both paramedics step out of the vehicle in a non-threatening manner. There was no “assault”, as the cop initially reported. He didn’t even slam the door, as he later reported.

All the paramedic was trying to do was his job, which was to get to the patient to the hospital as quick as possible.

And for that, Martin not only placed him in a chokehold, he told the paramedics that he was going to shoot them dead with his gun.

The fact that prosecutors refused to file charges on the cop proves they are nothing but a bunch of backwoods, slack jawed good ole boys who will always watch out for their own.

And they are putting the public in danger in the process.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Tags: First Amendment

184 responses so far ↓

1 Ripster40 // Jun 13, 2009 at 9:14 PM

Oh complete bullshit, ths guy needs to be fired now.

A cop shouldn’t be acting that way, especially when Paramedics are in an emergency situation.
2 keith // Jun 13, 2009 at 9:22 PM

wow! amazing a whole buncha yelling for no reason. that cop….
3 William Beem // Jun 13, 2009 at 9:27 PM

Interesting how they cut out the sound (selectively) toward the end. Makes me wonder what else the cops are covering.

That officer deserves to be arrested for battery, too.
4 Michaelk42 // Jun 13, 2009 at 9:31 PM

We test athletes for steroids, but not these guys.

You can’t even run a forklift at WalMart and not be drug tested.

And yet we let guys like this run around with guns.

(And if he’s not having a ‘roid rage fit here, what IS his excuse then?)

He also clearly cares more about his authoritah being respected than the patient in that ambulance. Even if it wasn’t rolling lights and sirens, the person inside could have still been in pain. I’ve been transported by ambulance, non-emergency, to be taken to a hospital where I could have my broken jaw set. Non-emergency, but would really like to get there and get my bone set, thanks.

But other human beings mean nothing to Officer Roidrage. Not when he has his wife watching from the car. So much for serve and protect.

Maybe the EMTs should get tasers to settle douchebags like his down.
5 JP // Jun 13, 2009 at 10:06 PM

An entire blog dedicated to police abuse. Blog owner, you’re right, the world is an imperfect place. Never let anyone tell you any different. lol
6 Jay // Jun 13, 2009 at 10:31 PM

@William: Agree with battery statement, but I think the mic cut out due to the scuffle.
7 John // Jun 13, 2009 at 11:21 PM

Curious what Jones opinion of the stop is now that we have the dashboard camera.

Cop: “Now… here, now”

Medic: “No, you now, what seems to be the problem?”

Cop: “What’s going on?”

Medic: “No.”

Cop: “I’m talking to the driver.”

Medic: “I’m talking to you. I’m the medic and I…”

Cop: “You better get back in that ambulance. I’m talking to the driver.”

Medic: “I’m in charge of this unit sir.”

Cop: “Okay.”

Medic: “My name is Maurice White

Cop: “Alright”

Medic: “I’m a physical care paramedic.”

Cop: (speaking to driver) “I’m gonna give you a ticket for failure to yield and when I go by you saying what’s going on you don’t need to be giving me no hand gestures. I’m not gonna put up with that shit. You understand me?”

Medic: “And I won’t put up with you talking to my driver like that sir.”

Cop: “I ain’t listening to you buddy. You get your ass back in that ambulance or I’m taking you in. I’m talking to the driver.”

Medic: “Take me in if you would.”

Cop: (to driver) “Come over here Paul.”

Driver: “We’ve got a patient…”

Medic: “No, We got a patient in this unit, right now.”

Cop: (to driver) “Okay. You want to go ahead and pull over to the side of the road when there’s an emergency vehicle behind you?”

Driver: “I didn’t…”

Medic: “You were tailgating us!”

Cop: “No I wasn’t!”

Medic: “You ran up on us quickly!”

Cop: “I did NOT run up on you quickly, buddy!”

Medic: “Yes, you did!”

Cop: “You better get back in that ambulance before you get your but to jail now. You understand me?”

Medic: “We gonna take my patient to the hospital, you can take me to jail, we’ll discuss this. Okay?”

Cop: “Come here Paul”

Medic: “No, no. We’ve got a patient in this…”

Cop: (cop grabs medic) “Get your ass… turn around.” (all hell breaks loose)

I see nothing that justifies the cop’s assault of the medic. Whoever cleared the cop after watching this video should be reprimanded (or hopefully fired).
8 Bill Rhodes // Jun 13, 2009 at 11:31 PM

That is the most egregious abuse of police power I have seen since Rodney King.
Had I been that EMT, I would not have stopped, have the discussion at the hospital.
Un-freakin-beliveable.
9 Nemo // Jun 13, 2009 at 11:56 PM

Didn’t the cop notice that the ambulance had to go around that white car before they could safely pull over? (Probably, but Officer Cartman had ahTHOR-I-tah that needed respectin’, right?)

Seriously, if you think OK Joe Hi-Po is bad, avoid OKC like the plague. The Town Clowns there make him look like a shining example of professionalism. I lived there for some years, and encountered /one/ Police officer, and one possible LEO. The rest were a pack of Barneys, save for a few that would have made good guards where Cool Hand Luke was imprisoned.

If you ever get the urge to say more than yessir/nossir to one of them, keep in mind that back around ’90 or so, the OKC area TCs met a mental case gone off his meds, standing in the door of his house, “armed” with a weed cutter, with a storm of gunfire, (circa 70 rounds fired, IIRC) killing him. No charges filed. If you’re pulled over, you’re better off with the Hi-Pos.
10 John // Jun 14, 2009 at 12:14 AM

Nemo,

You’re full of it. OKC is a great place to visit with some of the friendliest people in the entire country. The cops are no different, this bad one just needs to be weeded out.

Did the cops have tasers back in the late ’80′s when that happened?
11 Pinandpuller // Jun 14, 2009 at 12:40 AM

OK is a beautiful state but the DA didn’t do anyone any favors by not filing charges on this clown.

This is like the Treaty of Versailles: A guarantee of future hostilities. What’s the point of a law against interfering with EMT’s?

I hope Mr. White gets a ton of money. Mr asshole trooper can buy a fishing cabin with David Letterman.
12 Nemo // Jun 14, 2009 at 1:49 AM

@John

Ah, so your experience playing la turista trumps my years living there? Nice to know. I’ll tell it to the guy I “didn’t” see beat into submission by some of them. Why “didn’t” I see it? Why, because I was told by said soi disant “LEO”s that I didn’t, and it was my word against all of theirs.

Presumably, I wasn’t heckled and cussed over the exterior speakers of a cruiser while a little lost (and therefore driving somewhat under the speed limit, looking for familiar street signs) in downtown OKC, while driving my not-yet-locally-tagged (but perfectly legal) car. Such friendly “officers”, kindly directing me to return to the state in which I no longer resided. Obvioulsy tourist-friendly.

Surely, all my experiences and those of friends and acquaintances crumble in the face you your unfounded assertion that I’m “full of it”, oh my!

Don’t take /my/ advice, Johnny-boi. Visit the OK State Fair, and have a couple too many, and get a little boisterous*, and see what happens. But don’t say I didn’t warn you.
*Not violent, mind. I never advocate to strangers that they engage in mindless violence. Do so at your own risk.

But not to worry, Johnny says that OKC cops are A-OK! Just one bad apple in the whole state, yay! *sarcasm off*

Will you tell me the Daily Okie was lying about the poor mental case who brought his weed-cutter to the gunfight that the cops staged on his doorstep? Or is it just your fantasy that tasering the mentally ill cures mental illness? (On the plus side, you are doing a marvelous job of undermining the little trust that still remains in the police tht the public may harbor.)
13 Hazy // Jun 14, 2009 at 2:22 AM

He needs to be fired and then prosecuted.
14 Pinandpuller // Jun 14, 2009 at 3:08 AM

I was just over on one of the OK local news websites watching the whole video: http://www.newson6.com/

When that trooper pulls out of the parking lot where he was initially called he totally blows through a stop sign. Its a shame that those family members ran up into the shot. It’s still pretty obvious that it was comtempt of cop.

That trooper needs to be fired if for no other reason than he can’t physically handle people so he is going to tase or shoot someone to death.
15 Nemo // Jun 14, 2009 at 3:19 AM

Respectfully, Hazy;

He needs to be prosecuted, on a high-profile level (to ensure that the press’ eye is on the case, and bias be damned), convicted, and then fired.

He needs to be convicted in such a way as stains the name of the agency that trained and supported him, so far – and if his union lawyer’s involved, then /they/ need to have their name dragged through the dirt here, too.

Considering what happened to the troops at Abu Graib, who weren’t trained for the task, and endangered no one, this guy should face far worse, since he risked the well-being of a third party (the transportee), and ignored the Command structure of the ambulance he’d detained.

Anyone arguing that the driver should’ve been aware of the cop, had better be prepared to defend counter-accusations that the cop should’ve been aware of just /who/ is in charge of an ambulance, and the cop’s egrigious indifference regarding said chain of command.

but hey, it’s not about anything over Officer Cartman’s AwTHORitAH, now, is it?
16 John // Jun 14, 2009 at 3:42 AM

Nemo,

I lived 27 years in Oklahoma and graduated from the University of Oklahoma. My great-great grandfather (who fought for the union in the civil war) moved to Indian Territory with his family in 1892, a full 15 years before Oklahoma became a state and is now buried in Watonga. My family has lived there continuously ever since. I have been to every corner of every county of the state, have partied in the governor’s mansion and have served meals to the homeless there. When I die, I plan to be buried there.

Between us, when it comes to Oklahoma, if anyone is a tourista my friend – it is you.

“Visit the OK State Fair, and have a couple too many, and get a little boisterous*, and see what happens. But don’t say I didn’t warn you.”

Get drunk and make an ass of yourself ANYWHERE and you should expect to be dealt with. The fact that the OKC cops handled you only makes me respect them all the more.

The shooting you refer to appears to have happened in April of 1991. A grand jury was held with the officers being acquitted of any wrongdoing. A lawsuit was subsequently filed against the police and was eventually dismissed by a judge two years later. Given all of these facts I’m sure that your statement of 70 bullets being fired is complete crap.

Taser company history indicates that early Tasers were not popular with cops due to unreliability. If you remember, Rodney King was tasered but it didn’t stop him. It wasn’t until 1993 that ICER (the company that now makes Tasers) was formed. Widespread Taser use by police didn’t occur until after 1996

You are one of those whiny, complaining, little bitches who simultaneously complains about how mental people with power tools get shot while not wanting to give cops a less-than-lethal option for dealing with them.
17 Nemo // Jun 14, 2009 at 3:46 AM

Latest update:

http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/OHP-EMS-Incident-Dash-Cam-Released/OKZMNfFG80yXo4dXsVYISQ.cspx

Oh, and as for Johnny-boi, don’t make me drag my OK born and bred wife into this – she knows OK cops far, far better than you ever will.

But Johnny, please, please keep pretending that cops are liliy-white, even when they ain’t. Nothin’ like people like you to destroy that which you purport to defend.
18 John // Jun 14, 2009 at 4:22 AM

You conceded the point that, between us, you are the true tourista. Thanks.

I am not dragging your wife into this – you are. Lord knows, if she’s married to you she’s probably used to being dragged around a lot – my guess, by the hair – hence her increased experience with the police.

I never said all cops are lilly white. Don’t take your own confused, logically false arguments and attribute them to me.
19 Geoff Cummings // Jun 14, 2009 at 4:53 AM

I just can`t see why that cop wasn`t fired and prosecuted. He was in the wrong, and doesn`t deserve any sympathy.
20 john // Jun 14, 2009 at 7:08 AM

EMT is on a HUGE power trip himself! If he just listened to the police, he wouldve been on his way… but no, gotta put your two cents in.
EMT should be in Jail
21 NYCPhotorights // Jun 14, 2009 at 7:30 AM

If the EMT had listened to police his patient could have died – she was having CHEST PAINS – what if it was a HEART ATTACK? The PATIENT COMES FIRST – the cop by delaying the ambulance could have killed her. Nothing else matters – end of story!
22 Kevin Camp // Jun 14, 2009 at 7:54 AM

Officer was completely out of line, but where is everyone getting that his wife was in the car with him.
23 John Haggerty // Jun 14, 2009 at 9:10 AM

I am a paramedic. This whole thing got emotional real quick. It should have de-escalted much quicker had someone said just stop and take a breather. Once the family showed up the whole situation got out of control. No one thought to just stop and take a look around. This could have been settled much more efficiently at the hospital after the cop had called the ambulance company and had the supervisor meet him there.
24 Michaelk42 // Jun 14, 2009 at 9:50 AM

@John

“EMT is on a HUGE power trip himself! If he just listened to the police, he wouldve been on his way… but no, gotta put your two cents in.
EMT should be in Jail”

No, the cop is on a power trip, demanding his authoritah be respected to sooth his ego.

The EMT was concerned about his patient, his driver (aka his responsibilities, and protecting and serving the public). That’s not a power trip, that’s doing his job – even in the face of a violent, armed asshole with an attitude.

Also, it’s been stated that interfering with an EMT in the course of his duties is against the law there. If anyone should be in jail up on charges, its the cop.

And not only up on charges for interfering with the EMT, but for falsifying his report.

@Kevin – It’s been brought out in previous coverage that the woman the cop picked up on his “emergency” was his wife, and was the woman the EMTs thought the cop wanted them to have a look at.

You know, thinking the only reason a cop would run down and stop an ambulance like that would be to help someone in need of medical attention. A silly notion, I know.
25 Jim // Jun 14, 2009 at 10:45 AM

This would have been so much better if it had been the cop’s mother in the back of the ambulance.
26 cavale // Jun 14, 2009 at 10:59 AM

oh noes! NOT A PETITION!!!!!!

I bet he’ll be quaking in his boots once he finds out about this internet petition.
27 Nemo // Jun 14, 2009 at 11:19 AM

No, Johnny-boi, I didn’t concede that years of living in OKC makes me a tourist. I didn’t concede that a D&D deserves a summary beat-down, either – especially considering that at the time, said guy was merely being a nuisance, saying repeatedly “take me to jail”, as opposed to being taken to the drunk tank. No resistance, no violence, just a mumbling drunk. Perhaps you believe that some wall-to-wall counseling for the poor schmo was a friendly, professional response from the cops, but I don’t. They delived a beating simply because they were /annoyed/ with him.

Assuming that I was the one who was beaten’s a nice ploy, though, albeit a wishful fantasy on your part. Good schoolyard tactic.

I don’t concede anything about the mental case who was executed by the cops, either. The date you proveded doesn’t ring true to my memory, and the rest of what you said was merely apologist screed, assuming they had a right to execute him for the “crime” of being a mental case. Acquittal by a legal system biased towards police in general doesn’t buy many yams from me.

as for living in OK: If what you said is true, then you lived there longer. My in-laws, however have you beat, having lived in OK far longer than you, and with their Indian blood, likely superecede your ancestral prescence.

You said you live in OK. Does that mean you live in OKC metro? If so, where you live’s probably telling. Nichols Hills, p’raps? South of Reno? I rather doubt you live anywhere near the Red Dog, with your delusion that the OKC TCs are nothing but friendly professionals. Bricktown, maybe?

“John” – Hmmm, you ain’t Johnny North, by any chance? Not likely, as he’d not be likely to have your favorable views of the local Barneys.
28 Nemo // Jun 14, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Oh, and Johnny? If you’re saying “power tools”, then you’ve got the wrong case. Too bad for him the cops in question (as memory serves, they were acquitted, too – big surprise) weren’t professional enough to know how to talk down the poor nut, and instead escalated the situation until they could justifiably execute him. Sweet deal, for them.

You can comfort yourself, though. In a couple days, I do indeed have to “drag” my wife in for another round of chemotherapy for the breast cancer. That enough schadenfreude for ya, buddy?
29 John // Jun 14, 2009 at 1:26 PM

There is nothing more annoying that someone who is uniformly antagonistic and condescending to others but who then complains about how they are treated.

Suggestion: remove “buddy”, and adding a ‘y’ to the end of peoples names from your vocabulary. Go back and read your earlier posts. You harvest what you plant.

The grand jury that exonerated the officers you are fixated on. They looked at all the evidence, interviewed everyone involved and decided that you are wrong. Nine of the twelve people on that grand jury needed to agree with you. They didn’t.

The cops that shot that man didn’t have a less-than-lethal option for dealing with him. You should embrace Taser technology instead of bitching about it.
30 Michaelk42 // Jun 14, 2009 at 1:55 PM

@John

“The cops that shot that man didn’t have a less-than-lethal option for dealing with him. You should embrace Taser technology instead of bitching about it.”

False dichotomy. Just because tasers can be a better option does not mean they can’t be misused, or that there can never be valid complaints about their use.

Also false: They did have a less-than-lethal option even without the taser – it’s called not shooting a guy with a lawn tool, or pepper spray perhaps? Lack of taser does not preclude all other options.
31 jones // Jun 14, 2009 at 1:58 PM

If the paramedic was so concerned about the patient why did he choose to leave her unattended to go argue with the trooper.
32 John // Jun 14, 2009 at 2:24 PM

@MichaelK42

Tasers CAN be misused. Agreed. My point is that when they ARE misused the person(s) they were used against will still be alive to collect from the subsequent lawsuit. I bet the parents of the guy who was shot wish the cops had Tasers.

Tasers are a substantial improvement over pepper spray as they are more effective at immobilizing the subject.
33 Michaelk42 // Jun 14, 2009 at 3:26 PM

@Jones – That was the best you could come up with? Attacking the EMT and ignoring the trooper’s wrongdoing?

Because the EMT DID care about his patient and getting his job done, he had to go deal with a raging idiot trooper that clearly DIDN’T care about the patient (i.e. serving the public, not his ego.)

Deflection fail, jones.

@John – Except the times when tasers have been misused and the victim died… or even when they weren’t and the victim still died.

Tasers may or may not be a substantial improvement, but you’re still missing the point that the existence of tasers does not preclude the use of other means.
34 jones // Jun 14, 2009 at 3:41 PM

I’m not defending the cop, I just don’t understand why the EMT intervened, if he just stayed with the patient this thing never would have escalated.

If people are worried about dieing from a taser maybe they should obey the law.

It’s funny how thousands and thousands of cops get tasered every year and no cops have died.
35 Michaelk42 // Jun 14, 2009 at 3:59 PM

@jones – It shouldn’t have escalated because there shouldn’t have been anything to escalate in the first place. You don’t seem to recognize that the trooper road raging is the primary cause of all of this. Once the trooper caused the problem in the first place, the EMT had a DUTY to intervene in order to take care of his patient.

“If people are worried about dieing [sic] from a taser maybe they should obey the law.”

Wow. Argument from a bully right there. And doesn’t even address the point.

“It’s funny how thousands and thousands of cops get tasered every year and no cops have died.”

Actually, it’s not very funny, since even just getting test-tasered once, they’re still getting hurt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser_safety_issues#Use_on_police

“Police officers in at least five US states have filed lawsuits against Taser International claiming they suffered serious injuries after being shocked with the device during training classes.”

Perhaps we should try tasering officers in training multiple times under duress to make the comparison between “thousands and thousands” of cops and suspects/victims scientifically valid?
36 jones // Jun 14, 2009 at 4:05 PM

Mike – Perhaps we should try tasering officers in training multiple times under duress to make the comparison between “thousands and thousands” of cops and suspects/victims scientifically valid?

If you want to make it scientifically valid we should have them do some drugs, then break the law then fight with the police and then taser them.
37 Nemo // Jun 14, 2009 at 4:07 PM

@Jones

He intervened because he was on a call, and he was the man in charge of the unit, not the driver. A good supervisor does that sort of thing. Nice authoritarian shot about always be in perfect compliance with the law (up to and including obeying every order a ppoliceman gives you). But even then, you won’t entirely be safe from getting shot or tasered. Cops make mistakes, just like the people who get tasered do.

@John (last today, in this thread)

You expected me to be respectful towards you, when your first words to me were the insult: “You’re full of it”? How hypocritical.

It’s interesting that the only facts you relate are that the cops involved in gunning the guy down were acquitted and they didn’t have tasers (no argument on either). Why not let everyone else know how many shots were fired, and how the victim was “armed”. I still think we’re talking different incidents, but if you have better data or memory, bring it forward, and don’t just focus on the stuff you want to use. My memory was that ca. 70 rounds were fired, but by all means, correct me as to the facts, if you believe my ballpark was inaccurate. If only ca. 50 rounds were fired, I’ll happily retract the figure of ca. 70. If you assert that only 6 rounds were fired, I won’t even call you a liar, I’ll simply know that you are not talking about the same incident that I am.

And for the record, Okies, by and large, are fine, friendly folks. I liked them enough to marry one, and visit her family regularly, after all.
38 Michaelk42 // Jun 14, 2009 at 4:23 PM

@jones

I see you still have no answer to the actual point, why the cop was the entire source of the problem to begin with and the EMT was just dealing with that.

“If you want to make it scientifically valid we should have them do some drugs, then break the law then fight with the police and then taser them.”

Drugs aren’t always involved and you know it. And if you know the taser kills people under those circumstances it kind of kills your point about them being so “less-than-lethal.” You’re dodging the point.

Here’s a simple question:

Why is the officer’s demand for a show of respect so much more important than the well-being of the patient, and why is it wrong for the EMT to question that? Because the cop not once inquires as the patient’s condition, and does his best to ignore the person actually in charge of the unit.

Can you answer that?

Questioning authority isn’t a privilege or even a right. It’s a responsibility, and I respect the EMT for stepping up to it despite the actual, real threat the trooper posed.
39 genewitch // Jun 14, 2009 at 4:29 PM

jones: you’re at a new low. Somehow this is the EMT’s fault.

You’ve never had a boss stand up for you and his other charges during the course of work?

Come on man, you can’t excuse this behavior (edit) – by deflecting some of it onto the lead EMT.
40 Sam McCann // Jun 14, 2009 at 4:36 PM

this is bigger than rodeny allen rippy.i like the petition idea we should use that more often with these loser jackass cop pig jerks.
41 ALL BE DAMNED // Jun 14, 2009 at 5:21 PM

Well Once again carlos you have done a great job reporting all Facts on both threads ( i MEAN the facts you did have at the time of print) Yes the cop is on a power trip. Yes the EMT ( not the driver ) Stepped in on the patiants behalf If the Trooper was Smart ( sacasim here) he would have followd the ambulance to the hospital THEN chewed the drivers ass or NOT maybe he should have let him go all toagather and as for the DA he should be charged with the same thing the trooper is only under conspiricy to commit a crime, commiting the crime and refusal to do his LAWFUL DUTY……………
42 Ariel // Jun 14, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Jones, if you scuba dived you’d know the answer regarding Tasers. The Dive Tables were originally built from info gathered from Navy divers, young and in excellent health. Divers, neither young nor in top shape, would end up with mild bends even though they had stayed within the tables. Too many physical variables in the general population for the tables to be safe for everyone at all times.

If you Taser the general population, you are going to end up with deaths or severe injuries. Especially if you keep pulling the trigger.
43 John // Jun 14, 2009 at 9:49 PM

@Ariel

Applying your logic concerning Tasers we should do away with automobiles because their use guarantees society will end up with deaths and severe injuries.

Obviously, we will never do that because the benefit of their use far outweighs the cost. The same holds true with Tasers. If 10 people per year die from their use and they are used hundreds of thousands of times per year then the trade off for stopping their use isn’t worth it.

How many people die per year from falling coconuts? More than the number of people killed from Tasers I bet.
44 Michaelk42 // Jun 14, 2009 at 10:37 PM

@John

That wasn’t what Ariel was saying at all. You completely missed her point.
45 Ariel // Jun 14, 2009 at 11:35 PM

John, you missed the point entirely. Your example of the car doesn’t apply. Read the comment for meaning rather than thinking how you can rebut it while reading it. If you do that, and still need clarification, ask questions and I’ll answer them.

Tasers were taken from use as a replacement for a firearm, or heavy injurious use of baton, to an over used compliance tool. That was not its purpose to begin with, and please don’t tell me everyone its used on you would have shot or beaten with the baton. Its over use will lead to unnecessary deaths, innocent people who died simply because they didn’t fully and immediately comply with your orders. If you wouldn’t have pulled your gun and shot them, you shouldn’t pull the taser either (an overstatement but I’m tired of trying nuance).

If instead of “if 10 people die per year from their use” you wrote “if 10 people die per yer from their overuse or inappropriate use” the benefit goes away.

Michaelk42, the Ariel moniker comes from the Ariel Sq. 4, a British motorcycle long gone. I am not a mermaid.
46 jones // Jun 14, 2009 at 11:47 PM

Mike – Drugs aren’t always involved and you know it. And if you know the taser kills people under those circumstances it kind of kills your point about them being so “less-than-lethal.” You’re dodging the point.

Mike, many people using drugs and alcohol have died after fighting with the police who have not been tasered. So those people who died after being tasered may have just as well died even if they weren’t tasered. Should the police refuse to arrest people that they suspect are under the influence of drugs or alcohol because if the person fights it could contribute to their possible death?

It’s unfortunate when somebody dies under those circumstances but the responsibility falls on them.
47 jones // Jun 15, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Ariel – I think your problem is you think tasers should only be used in fatal force situations but that’s not how it is. A taser is not meant to take the place of a gun and an officer should not go into fatal force situations with a taser instead of a gun.
48 jones // Jun 15, 2009 at 12:09 AM

Aerial – innocent people who died simply because they didn’t fully and immediately comply with your orders.

If they are not complying they are not innocent, they are resisting……….
49 Michaelk42 // Jun 15, 2009 at 12:29 AM

@Ariel – Ah. Bit obscure, but sorry.

@jones – And that’s STILL not the point. No one ever said drugs weren’t EVER involved. Are you really this dense? Or is it NEVER the officer’s fault and always the victim’s?

“If they are not complying they are not innocent, they are resisting…”

Presuming it’s a lawful order. And that every instance of non-instant compliance actually justified taser use. And if cops were supposed to dole out instant punishment. Easy there Judge Dredd.

And as usual, and much like a troll, you can’t answer a simple question. Here it is again:

Why is the officer’s demand for a show of respect so much more important than the well-being of the patient, and why is it wrong for the EMT to question that? Because the cop not once inquires as the patient’s condition, and does his best to ignore the person actually in charge of the unit.

Can you answer that?
50 Ripster40 // Jun 15, 2009 at 1:06 AM

Jones is coming off as the type of person who thinks cops are the ultimate boss.

There not, we are the boss. I guess the term Civil Servant is gone with the wind.
51 jones // Jun 15, 2009 at 1:17 AM

Mike – @jones – And that’s STILL not the point. No one ever said drugs weren’t EVER involved. Are you really this dense? Or is it NEVER the officer’s fault and always the victim’s?

Mike, if the use of the taser is justified then yes it’s the suspect’s fault.

The officer didn’t know there was a patient at the time of the stop because the ambulance didn’t have it’s lights and sirens on. He wasn’t informed their was a patient until the incident already started to escalate.

The EMT was supposedly so concerned about the patient yet he leaves her alone and doesn’t even bother to tell the officer they have a patient until 32 seconds later. The driver is the one who finally mentions a patient, if the driver didn’t say they had a patient the second guy might never have said anything about it. In fact, the second guy voices his concern about the way the officer is speaking to the driver before he even mentions the patient. He is more concerned about the officer swearing then he is the patient.

He also lied in his statement about being pulled out of the ambulance by the arm which the first tape shows didn’t happen but you probably don’t care about that.

You can hide behind the he was looking out for the patient crap all you want but the tape shows the truth. 32 seconds and he doesn’t mention the patient until the driver does.

I think the cop and the EMT were both unprofessional.
52 John // Jun 15, 2009 at 1:21 AM

@Ariel

Got your point. You’re saying that baseline safety testing on Tasers was done with superior physical subjects that don’t mimic society as a whole.

I’m saying that the 10 or so people who die are an acceptable loss in comparison with the benefit. I don’t believe there is a net loss of life with Tasers – quite the opposite. There are daily situations where Tasers actually save lives making their existence a net positive for society.
53 diomedesxx // Jun 15, 2009 at 1:34 AM

Why even ask, I mean Jones has made it a point over the entire tenure he has posed here to dodge the central questions, attack ad hominem, employ logical fallacies, and use straw-man arguments to further his viewpoint. That, and he is still missing Ariel’s point that any deaths (those “acceptable losses”) are too many.
It’s obvious that he is correct in his assertions [sarcasm on the previous, obviously], and if you question it he will simply do one of the above, probably an ad hominem or an informal logical fallacy.
Back to the point of the article, unfortunately police having control over their emotions is a problem. Yes, they are human being, just like all of us, but the point some are missing is that the job they are hired for should have very high standards. Noticeably not, though. I still vividly remember the last time an officer Terry-stopped my on a sidewalk, and I refused to ID myself (legal here in TX). He nearly blew a gasket; it would have been funny, if he wasn’t calling me a terrorist at the time – that’s the bad thing about trying to photograph in public in rual-ish areas of Texas.
54 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 2:25 AM

John, thank you for your #52. That was my point.
And I agree with you that there is a net benefit, but I would still maintain that they are being overused as a lazy “get compliance” technique, in some cases even ego satisfaction. And as that use grows, the net benefit will be reduced rather than maximized. And, frankly, if people see the Police using these more as cattle prods than as for avoiding the use of deadly force, you’ll find organized groups calling for their curtailment. The net is going to reinforce this because Police can’t lie about why they used force (no offense), and they are not going to be judged by IA but by the public. Police unions are strong but not that strong.

People skills, defusing techniques, deescalation, showing respect of others, or even detached professionalism, are better tools in the long run, for the Police and the public. Save it for the real scumbags, or the real situations where its better than deadly force.
55 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 2:53 AM

Sigh, Jones, I’ll tell you the same thing I told John, reread my comment #45 and try to understand, actually try it not while working out a rebuttal. I was well ahead of you, see between the parentheses.

These weapons – the taser, plastic bullets, bean bags, etc. – were developed for situations where there was a gap and an officer might have to use deadly force because there was no other choice at that time, which does not translate to “a fatal force situation” now that the taser exists. That is how the taser, the long distance cattle prod, was sold to the public when it was introduced. Not as a lazy way to get compliance in nearly any situation.

As for resisting arrest, we all know how that can be gamed. He wouldn’t have been arrested if he hadn’t resisted arrest. And, Jones, “If they are not complying they are not innocent, they are resisting..” comes close to Kafkaesque, not to mention a stunted duality. Stunted because I know that a cop can manipulate, or have very poor people skills, or be emotionally stunted (us v. them), or lack basic respect for others (us v. them), all of which can escalate a situation that the citizen pays for in the end.

As for innocence, there are so many laws that no one is “innocent” in your meaning. Alcoholism, and alcohol abuse, in Police runs at twice the rate of the general population. Have you looked the other way when you knew a fellow officer is driving drunk? Have you been in a bar when a fellow officer became drunk and disorderly or combative, hurt someone, started a fight? Did you arrest them like you would have someone else? Are you innocent?
Hell, Jones, if you have an eagle feather you’re a felon.
56 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 3:41 AM

diomedesxx #53,
“and he is still missing Ariel’s point that any deaths (those “acceptable losses”) are too many.”
Reminds me of Independence Day when the Secretary says “Uh, Mr. President, that’s not entirely accurate.”

If the taser is used for what it was intended for, situations that are seemingly escalating into deadly force, then I can accept some deaths, obviously. I understand this is a fine line for a cop and that he can make a mistake in judgment. I do not accept deaths when the taser is being used for compliance only. I really hope I don’t have to explain this to others.
57 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 3:51 AM

My #55, a correction: if you have two eagle feathers you’re a felon. It’s only a misdemeanor for one, with punishment up to $100,000 and one year in prison. So many criminals, so little time.
58 Pissed off Vet // Jun 15, 2009 at 3:59 AM

I hope his children get to see this,and his mother,his neighbors,his pastor ect…It`s very easy to have an IQ too high to be a cop…like 90 or less is what the Academy wants the applicants to have.
59 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 4:25 AM

Jones #51, So we have a cop that either lied or was mistaken and an EMT that either lied or was mistaken. Which lie or mistake causes whom to go to jail?

As for the EMT escalating the situation, and not mentioning the patient soon enough, from what I can see he was 1) trying to find out why he had a screaming aggressive cop going after his driver and 2) trying to assert his authority and position in charge. Both might have slowed him down regarding mentioning the patient. However, I can give you a rashomon on this one.

Regardless of professionalism, this event should never have occurred in the first place. The ambulance driver pulled over when he could safely, which he determines not the cop. Lets be really frank here: the cop was emotionally off that day; he was angry that the ambulance did not pull over quickly enough for him, whether it was safe or not; thought the driver flipped him off; and went to teach that driver a lesson.

I’ve just described road rage. Who’s to blame?
60 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 4:48 AM

Pissed off Vet #58,
The only time I’ve seen an IQ max was one department that actually gave 135 as the upper limit. Given that there are only about 6.4 million people in the US at or above 130, and only about 330 thousand at or above 150, it stands to reason that most LEOs won’t have really high IQs. But 90 or below is simply an unlikely and unfair accusation.
I have no doubt that both LEOs on this thread are intelligent men. I just disagree with them.
Good night until tomorrow.
61 John // Jun 15, 2009 at 12:42 PM

@ Ariel #54

“People skills, defusing techniques, deescalation, showing respect of others, or even detached professionalism, are better tools in the long run, for the Police and the public.”

Agreed.

There is a great book called “Verbal Judo” written by a guy who didn’t become a cop until he was 38. Prior to that, he was an English teacher. He now trains police officers in getting compliance without resorting to force. I think this kind of training should be manditory in every police department because using persuasion other than force should ALWAYS be the first option.

http://www.verbaljudo.com/kata/
62 Michaelk42 // Jun 15, 2009 at 3:58 PM

@jones – And non-shockingly, you didn’t answer the question. So very not surprised.

The entertaining bit is that you stayed up so late just to try and put more blame on the EMT and call him a liar. Never mind the officer being the actual liar.

(BTW, 2:05 in the Youtube video. He gets pulled out there. Right before the choking. Are you lying or just too blind to see?)

Nobody’s hiding behind anything but you, Jones, and everyone here seems to see that.
63 jones // Jun 15, 2009 at 4:31 PM

I didn’t realize 01:17 am was so late, what are you 80?

As far as your question, you make an assumption that the cop is putting his demand for respect in front of the patients well being. I see the EMT as the one who is letting the patient play second fiddle to his demand for respect. How many times did he say I’m in charge before the driver had to remind him that they had a patient. The first words out of his mouth should have been we’re taking a patient to the hospital instead of, I’m in charge. Not to mention nice job belittling the driver, I’m sure the driver was more than capable of handling the situation without his partner, I mean boss, jumping in.

His statement is pretty clear, if you bothered to read it, that he claims the officer pulled him out by the arm when the video clearly shows he exits on his own to talk to the second officer.
64 jones // Jun 15, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Mike, can you give a good reason why the EMT’s waited 32 seconds before informing the officer they had a patient.
65 Michaelk42 // Jun 15, 2009 at 4:44 PM

@jones No, I’m not 80, but I do have a job.

“you make an assumption that the cop is putting his demand for respect in front of the patients well being”

You don’t seem to get that the cop’s demand for respect shouldn’t have any place at all in a situation that shouldn’t even be. There shouldn’t even BE a demand for “respecting his authoritah.” The sad thing is you seem to think it’s OK for the cop to make that demand.

The EMT isn’t making a demand for respect. He’s trying to deal with a grown man throwing a temper tantrum.

What you can’t seem to fathom is that the trooper’s psychotic bullying is what creates the situation in the first place. The EMT is asserting his authority over the cop in the situation and letting him know there’s a patient is in the wrong order for you? Miss the forest for the trees often?

Driver reminded or chimed in as well? You seem determined to put the EMT in as bad a light as possible – and you have to, in order to try and distract from the the trooper’s bullying in the first place.

Yes, I read emtstatement_0509.pdf just fine. I see him getting pulled from the ambulance and put in a chokehold by an out of control cop on a power trip.
66 Michaelk42 // Jun 15, 2009 at 4:49 PM

@jones It’s Michael.

Several good reasons. The trooper’s unfounded rage. Thinking that he’d gotten them to pull over to look at the woman in his car. Wondering why a grown man was throwing such a fit over a perceived slight.

I’m willing to give people a couple of minutes at least to figure out how to deal with an armed, enraged threat like that trooper, that seems to have forgotten that they’re all supposed to be on the same team.
67 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 6:00 PM

Michaelk42,
dirtying the victim to draw attention from the perp is a typical technique. The trooper, I think, exhibited a form of road rage. He escalated the situation just by going back to the ambulance.
68 Ariel // Jun 15, 2009 at 6:14 PM

John #61,
Total agreement regarding that form of training. This protects everyone. Escalation of violence is a vicious circle, and ultimately the only control the LEO has over escalation is over himself. Verbaljudo is a good term, verbalaikido would be even better but doesn’t have the impact.
69 genewitch // Jun 15, 2009 at 6:27 PM

Jones isn’t unintelligent at all. he speaks well and catches meaning perfectly well. It’s the formulation of rebuttals that elude him, which is probably common in 90+% of the population, especially those with higher intelligence.

At a certain point, someone with 2 or more standard deviations above the average IQ starts to get sick of repeating themselves, and they stick to a canard – which is really effective against people in the general population. It doesn’t work online so well, mostly because you can see an entire conversation IN context at a glance.

jones seems to be wanting us to concede that the ambulance driver was out of line as an aside to the main point, that the police officer was out of line, not in conjunction with.

jones: if this had been a normal situation where the ambulance was empty, and they got pulled over and the guy got out of the back and in the officer’s face – i would agree with you, completely. He was belligerent and was trying to control the situation, obviously. So yes, the EMT guy could be construed as having been “out of line” – but not in this circumstance.

His actions were not in a vacuum, they were in response to the officer’s actions. Therefore his response was valid and effective – this time.
70 genewitch // Jun 15, 2009 at 6:33 PM

John @61: i’ve heard of that book, which is good for compliance and diffusing a situation as you say.

There’s a better book for the general population that would/can be better for dealing with authority, called “The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense”

http://tinyurl.com/GAVSD11 (amazon page)
71 Robert // Jun 15, 2009 at 8:01 PM

When will it stop . Abuse of power by a crazed cop who thinks that making a point is greater than people security . Obviously this cop was having a bad day and caused all this mess . i am sure that the EMT was not looking for trouble nor did he want any. He as merly doing his job and came into contact with another person failing at his. The officer should be held accountable , fired ad charges brought against him. Oklahoma State troopers need to distance themselves to save face.
72 Greta King // Jun 15, 2009 at 8:12 PM

Both of these police officers need to be fired immediately, without any severance pay. I am disgusted!
73 jones // Jun 15, 2009 at 8:58 PM

gene – jones: if this had been a normal situation where the ambulance was empty, and they got pulled over and the guy got out of the back and in the officer’s face – i would agree with you, completely

That is my point Gene, it was a normal situation for 32 seconds until the driver said they had a patient. Up until then the cop was being a dick but he was in the right as far as the stop was concerned and the other EMT had no right to interfere with the stop. Had the driver or other EMT immediately mentioned the patient and the cop continued delaying them then I would put 100% of the fault on the cop.

Once he was informed there was a patient he should have immediately released them and continued it at the hospital if he felt it was necessary.
74 d daxx // Jun 15, 2009 at 9:19 PM

These cowboy cops with police-state mentalities, that is, if they have mentalities, think that we live under martial law and that they can do whatever they please.
Each and every time that they perform an action that is egregious and criminal they should be tried exactly like any other criminal. They are employees of public servants and should be held liable to and for the same standards!
75 Bert // Jun 15, 2009 at 11:00 PM

GEE and cops wonder why people think they are about as bright as a burnt out light bulb. Makes me glad im not from Oklahoma
76 Ripster40 // Jun 16, 2009 at 1:06 AM

Jones: Sadly it still doesn’t matter if he told him at the moment or 5 minutes later they had a patient.

Maybe if the cop took 5 seconds and stopped acting like a dick and had a civil discussion would the EMT would mention that he had a patient.

My copy buddy even agrees this guy needs to get fired.
77 mike from australia // Jun 16, 2009 at 1:11 AM

this does not surprise me one bit….
i grew up in a a town in australia where the state police academy is ,our weekend s were full of getting harassed by young ego filled power tripping police who wanted to have it their way all day long whilst on the beat…. this guy is just another one of them … there are these types in all forms … i also have family who are police officers . the are good people whom im fairly certain dont have the characteristics that these Cowboy s who need respect do..
why this guy was not stood down is beyond me… but none the less this is a gross misuse of his power , he should be sent down to the ghettos of compton with a uniform and a toy gun to wander ..see how big of a man he is then… obviously one of those nerdy kids at school who got oushed around his whole life…
karma hopefully will have its way with him
78 DD // Jun 16, 2009 at 6:30 AM

First of all, obviously the patient was not in life threatening situation, therefore the ambulance should have yielded the right of way. The EMT has failed to realize law enforcement has the authority of right of way and the ambulance does not.

Secondly the trooper should have followed the ambulance to the ED and settled the issue after the patient was delivered. Obviously the trooper was not responding to a life threatening situation, therefore the trooper had time on his hands to take care of this situation appropriately.
79 Michaelk42 // Jun 16, 2009 at 7:42 AM

@DD – Eh? You didn’t watch the video, did you?

The ambulance clearly yielded as quickly as it safely could.
80 Guy Bertram // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:10 AM

I think pressuring the OK Governor with a BOYCOTT of OK businesses will continue to get far more attention than a petition, but sign away.

OK -Please POST/REPOST

“Until Trooper Martin is disciplined/retrained and apologies issued from the Oklahoma Governor’s office to White, the patient and her family, I continue to support Georgia Paramedic Hayden Barnes’s BOYCOTT of QuikTrips, ConocoPhillips, and Alamo and National Car Rental companies for us out of towners while we are

NOT driving through Oklahoma watching out for OHP and their wives running ambulances off the road on the way to stolen car reports (picking up his wife) and returning to illegally assault EMT.”
81 jones // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:40 AM

The ambulance did not yield right away. The vehicle in front of the ambulance even yielded before the ambulance. Then then ambulance still took time to yield.
82 NYCPhotorights // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:51 AM

@DD
How did the cop know what the condition of the patient was – he didn’t even care to ask!

@ jones
Here in NYC some people take longer to yield than others – lights and sirens often confuse a lot of drivers, or they freeze and hesitate before acting – either way I have never heard of a cop returning to a road to chase a driver for failing to yield fast enough. Seems like OK troopers have a lot of free time on their hands!

A simple solution to the officer’s ego trip would have been to call the ambulance company and report that the driver failed to yield.
83 jones // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:59 AM

The car in front of the ambulance didn’t seem confused and I don’t see how the driver of an emergency vehicle can get confused when they see another emergency vehicle.

I would buy that if this was a 5 lane highway with cars everywhere but it was pretty simple, pull over to the right.
84 NYCPhotorights // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:03 AM

@ jones – you are really missing the real point of all this. The patient’s condition! The cop simply didn’t care!!

As for the failing to yield I am merely pointing out that REAL COPS like the NYPD don’t waste their time with such minor violations.
85 TJD // Jun 16, 2009 at 11:28 AM

Wow you Oklahomans are somethin’. This makes me regret even considering to be a cop. This guy should be locked up and put behind bars.
86 Kylie // Jun 16, 2009 at 11:49 AM

jones @80 – the ambulance DID yield right-of-way as soon as he safely could.

Here’s the scenario as I see it: The driver in front of the ambulance heard a siren, looked in his rear-view mirror, saw an ambulance and yielded. The driver of the ambulance, intent on driving safely yet quickly to the hospital, took a moment longer to hear/register the siren coming from behind (which makes sense when you consider that people tend to block out sounds they hear all the time, and an ambulance driver would hear sirens a lot), at which point the ambulance has caught up to the vehicle in front that has pulled over, so now has to pass said vehicle before he can safely pull over. Cop was delayed by ambulance all of about 4 seconds. Definitely NOT long enough of a delay to warrant the cop’s attitude when he pulled the ambulance over (or even to warrant him pulling them over in the first place).
87 Clara // Jun 16, 2009 at 12:19 PM

I wonder what would have happened if the cop’s momma had been the one in the ambulance. The cop has an attitude problem and it needs to be adjusted. He needs to be fired and fired now!!
88 GayNelle // Jun 16, 2009 at 12:29 PM

He needs to be fired and charged with failure to render aid and everything anyone else would be charged with! There needs to be a statement made by the police commissioner, the chief and the mayor.
89 Ariel // Jun 16, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Jones
I’ve seen people pull over two hundred or more feet in front of me to yield to a fire engine I can barely see in my mirror. There are a myriad of factors as to why one person recognizes an emergency vehicle coming before another person does. I have also had to pass cars that have pulled over before I could, should I have rear ended them instead?
90 Troy // Jun 16, 2009 at 1:18 PM

if the paramedic was so concerned about his patient, why did he leave her to argue with the officer? The ambulance should have been running with its emergency lights on. I understand not using the siren because of not wanting to excite or panic the patient, but the lights are quiet, a signal to other motorist, and added safety for the ambulance crew. I’m not saying the officer was right in everything he did, but he, for the most part, followed procedure.
91 Michaelk42 // Jun 16, 2009 at 2:26 PM

@jones – Oh, you’re just bloody *comical* now. The ambulance is required to pull over in a safe manner, not as fast as the trooper *wants*. Ambulances, even without another car in the way and with a patient inside, aren’t exactly *nimble*.

Yes, that 3-4 seconds it took to get over was just absurd. (Taste the sarcasm.)

@Troy – Followed which procedures, the ones for running lights and sirens to pick his wife up where she was for whatever reason, or chasing down an emergency vehicle to get his ego stroked/assault emergency workers actually doing their jobs?
92 Michaelk42 // Jun 16, 2009 at 2:31 PM

@Troy – Also, if an EMT has a cop chase them down with an unidentified person in their car, after they just saw them running lights and sirens, they’re probably going to assume it’s likely that the person in the car might just need immediate care. The patient in the ambulance is stable, so they get out to check.

It’s called triage, and that’s part of an emergency medical person’s job.

Besides, what jackass would chase down and stop an ambulance to bitch about how long it took them to yield and have a raging, violent fit about thinking he was flipped off?

Oh! Daniel Martin. Now we know.
93 Yo // Jun 16, 2009 at 3:04 PM

“Besides, what jackass would chase down and stop an ambulance to bitch about how long it took them to yield and have a raging, violent fit about thinking he was flipped off?”

@Michael: This says it all. ’nuff said.
94 BHT // Jun 16, 2009 at 3:23 PM

I see constant questions about why the EMT did not immediately tell the Trooper he has a patient in the vehicle.

From what I see, it was a non critical condition patient. When the trooper starts going off on the driver and the EMT comes out to find out whats the problem, the trooper clearly ignores the chain of command, and keeps talking to the driver. Even after the EMT has explained that he is in charge of the vehicle, the trooper ignores him and goes back to the driver.

The EMT was clearly, first, trying to establish the fact that he was the person the trooper should be addressing, so he can find out why the were pulled over, and get on w/ getting his patient to the hospital.

I find it amusing that no one mentions the trooper starts the whole entire incident in an aggressive rage, instead of a calm, non threatening manner a police officer should use.
You never start off any encounter aggressively, to prevent the situation from escalating, as clearly seen here.

In any situation where a person is being threatened, the natural reaction of any person, is flight or fight. In this case, an aggressive and ARMED officer, right from the start.
95 Ariel // Jun 16, 2009 at 4:53 PM

BHT,
Well written. The trooper escalated the situation from the very beginning, which I still believe was a mild road rage aggravated by misperceiving the gesture by the Driver, if the Driver and EMT are telling the truth.
I agree completely regarding the EMT. The trooper, again, was focused on the Driver because of the gesture. If the trooper had started calmly, there would have been no incident. Of course, if he had been calm he likely would not have gone after the ambulance in the first place.
96 Geoff Cummings // Jun 16, 2009 at 5:43 PM

I live in the UK. I just can`t possibly think of anything like what happened with that cop going on here. If it did I think questions would be asked at Ministerial level.
97 Lisa // Jun 16, 2009 at 5:50 PM

Not only do I hope the cop gets fired I also hope he or a loved one is in an ambulance in need of care and have this happen to him! Maybe then he’ll see what an ass he is.
98 a j // Jun 16, 2009 at 7:02 PM

man i saw the video amd am embarrassed by the actions of the officer.He had no idea of the nature of the patients illness and he was only concerned with a traffic violation.
99 jones // Jun 16, 2009 at 7:14 PM

Lisa, I can understand being upset with the officer but wishing harm on somebody who had nothing to do with this incident?

Hoping for an innocent person to get injured is deplorable and you should be embarrassed.
100 Lakalmbach // Jun 16, 2009 at 8:07 PM

It’s a police state. They will continue to take our rights away as long as we accept it. Tasering people, sometimes to death, for things like traffic violations, shows how they see us as terrorists. If you’re going to defend tasering, you don’t deserve your rights as an American citizen. You deserve their next step, which is bringing in foreign military to merge with the police, so you can’t leave your home unless they say you can. You deserve what you are defending, and you don’t understand what Americans are losing.
101 Observer // Jun 16, 2009 at 8:20 PM

First, I am pro-law enforcement, but I don’t condone the actions of the trooper. He was overly aggressive, and only escalated the situation when he made a sarcastic remark to the ambulance crew over the radio (prior to the traffic stop).

However, stating that he was running lights and siren to pick his wife up from the police station IS COMPLETELY FALSE. He was responding to assist a local police agency with a reported stolen vehicle. The local agency made the traffic stop at a roadside gas station. The trooper was disregarded from the assist shortly after he arrived, and then he stopped the ambulance. His wife was in the car the entire time.

You don’t have to like the police, but printing such false information doesn’t give your argument much credibility either.
102 Jeremy // Jun 16, 2009 at 8:29 PM

This is a total abuse of the law that cop pulled him over for no reason the cop even attacked the guy for no reason and the cop must have been on steroids and/or drugs because he flipped out when the paramedic was trying to save someone the cap was/and is clearly off his rocker.
103 jones // Jun 16, 2009 at 8:30 PM

Observer, you must be new here, that is the norm.
104 dave // Jun 16, 2009 at 8:41 PM

He needs to move on to a new career field……..hopefully away from anything requiring good judgement
105 Michaelk42 // Jun 16, 2009 at 8:42 PM

@observer

“You don’t have to like the police, but printing such false information doesn’t give your argument much credibility either.”

If she was in the car the whole time, they could have just said so. As it was it took them until a few days ago to even identify who she was. It was pointed out on Statter that at 1:32 in the dashcam video it does appear that someone gets in the car… Of course, simply releasing that info in the first place would have cleared it up, wouldn’t it?

http://www.wusa9.com/news/columnist/blogs/2009/06/prosecutor-blasts-trooper-in-letter-to.html
106 Observer // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:06 PM

The fact that his wife was in the car has no bearing on the altercation that occurred subsequent to the traffic stop. Yes, I’ve watched the dashcam footage, and read Statter911 daily. Did you think that the trooper could have exited the vehicle for a few seconds and then gotten back in? Why would his wife had happened to have been at a run-down gas station?
107 jones // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:17 PM

Mike – If she was in the car the whole time, they could have just said so.

And since they didn’t say so let’s just make shit up.

Observer – Why would his wife had happened to have been at a run-down gas station

It sure looked like a gas station to me to but when I read the article and it said “what appears to be a police station” I didn’t know what to think.
108 Michaelk42 // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:31 PM

@Observer =shrug= Why wouldn’t she?

We don’t know. And her presence in the car more than likely influenced the EMT response, if you’ll remember. So yes, it did have a bearing.

@jones

Yeah, we’d have a better idea of what to think if the police had actually been honest to begin with. Making an inference from the video available isn’t making things up.

Then again, you’ve looked at video previously and claimed it didn’t show things it did, so I don’t have a lot of faith in anything you say anyway.

You’ve already demonstrated that a cop could probably eat a baby off the hood of his cruiser and you’d blame the baby for being so damn tasty.

(And then claim the edited dash cam footage doesn’t tell the whole story.)
109 JustMe // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:42 PM

The DA should put him on leave w/o pay, line his ducks in a row and then fire away.
Oh, I guess I was thinking of Internal Affairs on some cop show where they really go after the cop(s) for alleged infractions and nail their arse to the wall when it is proven they did commit wrongdoing…Yep, I must remember we are living in the real world.
Honestly, if that was my mother? I would have been on the cell phone calling for another ambulance immediately and not even waste my time trying to explain to the deaf ass of an officer and then I would have sued the living hell out of all involved from the cop all the way to the top for ignoring the real issue – - the patient.
One more thing, it really showed the callousness of the officer when he opened the door to ‘tell’ the patient she would be on her way in just a moment. That showed he was derelict in his duty to ‘serve and protect’ and that he acknowledged there was a person in need of medical attention to which he obstructed their right to immediate help regardless of what we may think may have been an emergency or non-emergency. ~Fire him.
110 james // Jun 16, 2009 at 9:54 PM

this cop should never be aloud to practice law again……
111 JustMe // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:03 PM

@ james
Not trying to be rude to you but that was certainly was not practicing “law”, that was abuse of (what the ofc perceived to be) power.
I noticed in the clip on YouTube that when the other officer put the moves on the EMT the original officer really showed more of his ‘stuff’. Totally disgusting…
112 JustMe // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:06 PM

PS: Kudos to the family for showing great patience, manners, and calmness while this tirade by the ofc was going on. Your mother has a great family and I know is proud. : )
113 Tony // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:16 PM

I really do feel that these officers should be Fired for this type of conduct. What is the Chief of Oklahoma Police Dept is doing about this???
Is this the type of behavior acceptable in this state also???
114 frank // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Real professional Trp. A-hole. No wonder people hate Police. He better hope those ambulance drivers aren’t on duty the day that trooper needs medical help.
115 frank // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Real professional Tpr. A-hole. No wonder people hate Police. He better hope those ambulance drivers aren’t on duty the day that trooper needs medical help.
116 frank // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Tony, to answer your question of What is the chief doing. He’s doing what most chiefs do….. Either lie about it or nothing. They (chiefs) are bigger cowards than the criminals.
117 Observer // Jun 16, 2009 at 10:53 PM

@michaelk42

You appear to assume that the medic even saw the trooper’s wife in the vehicle. We don’t know that he did, therefore, we can’t assume that it DID have any bearing on it.
118 Michaelk42 // Jun 16, 2009 at 11:09 PM

@observer I’m not assuming anything. I read the EMT’s report. I thought you said you read Statter daily? That’s where I got it from.

“When the officer came to a complete stop behind the ambulance, I noticed a woman in the front seat. Based on the officer’s erratic driving behavior, I thought that the woman in the front seat of the cruiser was in need of immediate medical attention; hence, I exited the rear of the ambulance in order to assess the situation.”

So actually, yes, it did have bearing on it. And apparently you’ve not been reading Statter too closely if you didn’t notice the links to the statements.
119 Ariel // Jun 16, 2009 at 11:33 PM

Michaelk42,
I have a very young daughter who nearly always blames the reactions of those around her for her behavior, no matter how egregious her preceding behavior. She also nearly always blames her physical or verbal escalation on the reactions to her preceding behavior. She demands respect without earning it. I and she have a long road ahead of us.
Perhaps she is destined to be part of “the new professionalism”, or at the very least an apologist.
120 Doug // Jun 16, 2009 at 11:52 PM

After watching it one more time, the dash cam, I think the officer really took a blow to the ego, already bruised, when he couldn’t just manhandle the big EMT guy. Think that made it even worse for him to maintain his cool. Most of the times when someone is mad they have been hurt somehow. Anyone with that fragile of an ego doesn’t need to be carrying a gun.
121 James // Jun 17, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Why did the cop leave the previous location he was at?? he was supposed to assist them, but he was so pissed that the ambulance didnt yeild, that he tore out of that parking lot like a bat out of hell. his duty was to assist the sheriffs, if he dont get fired for acosting the medic, he should be diciplined for not assisting the sheriff. that comes first, who cares about failure to yeild, alot of police let that slide, unless someone is dying, then they write the ticket. I believe both parties were in the wrong.
122 Guy Bertram // Jun 17, 2009 at 12:21 AM

Jones EAT IT! MichaelK42 Props!

“Then again, you’ve looked at video previously and claimed it didn’t show things it did, so I don’t have a lot of faith in anything you say anyway.

You’ve already demonstrated that a cop could probably eat a baby off the hood of his cruiser and you’d blame the baby for being so damn tasty.

ROTFLMAO MichaelK42!

OK -Please POST/REPOST

“Until Trooper Martin is disciplined/retrained and apologies issued from the Oklahoma Governor’s office to White, the patient and her family, I continue to support Georgia Paramedic Hayden Barnes’s BOYCOTT of QuikTrips, ConocoPhillips, and Alamo and National Car Rental companies for us out of towners while we are

NOT driving through Oklahoma watching out for OHP and their wives running ambulances off the road on the way to stolen car reports (picking up his wife) and returning to illegally assault EMT.”
123 John // Jun 17, 2009 at 1:28 AM

I don’t normally comment on any story but I have been around this industry most of my life. My brother had a very large ambulance company and I have several friends and family members who are police officers. Both are first responders and should act professional at all times. No matter how mad the trooper was, as soon as the medic said that they where transporting a patient. The Trooper should have asked them what hospital and met them there. Had the ambulance been running there lights letting the trooper know that they where in transport or on the way to a call this most likely this would not have happen at all. If that patient has any problems from the delay of treatment . The state is going to have two lawsuits, one from the patient, and one from the Ambulance companies insurance recouping there expenses and pay out involved. I DON’T thank the trooper should be fired but instead he should have to take anger management classes and get a desk job for at least a couple of years being involved in training and planing first response plans with state and county EMA and let him learn how important it is to have your community first responders to fill equal and trust each other in emergency situations. I only fill the trooper should be fired if he is not man and doesn’t apologize to both medics and admit he was wrong and he was having a bad day. And maybe for the assault charge the judge will sentence him 200 hours community service working at the ambulance company washing and cleaning. We need both of these services and most of the people doing them.
124 John T. // Jun 17, 2009 at 1:38 AM

It would not be in that cops favor to be injured on duty and have the same paramedic crew get the call.
125 Pinandpuller // Jun 17, 2009 at 2:03 AM

This trooper is damaged goods. He could be provoked in the future by anyone who recognizes his name and reputation. He could also second-guess himself in a situation that requires use of force and get himself or others hurt or killed. He should be a high school coach.

He should also avoid any procedures that require catheterization.
126 Matthew // Jun 17, 2009 at 9:23 AM

This is the most blatant misuse of power I have ever seen.
127 Nicole Begin // Jun 17, 2009 at 9:23 AM

This cop should be euthanized! He is obviously on a power trip!
128 Andrea Davis // Jun 17, 2009 at 9:25 AM

He should be stripped of his badge.
129 Michael Cox // Jun 17, 2009 at 1:21 PM

That officer should be fired not allowed to hold a job in any kind of police work or security jobs. H should be charged assult and verbal abuse. He’s going to pull over the wrong person and get his ass blownaway.
130 sickntired08 // Jun 17, 2009 at 3:48 PM

I bet if the lady die while this was going on, the cop would have lost his f-ing job then.. the city would cut him lose to protect themselves from a wrongful death suit…

then again most cops are nothing more then abuser and killers with a badge..
131 Kevin Camp // Jun 17, 2009 at 4:18 PM

Frank and John T.-
I completely disagree. The EMT’s are professionals and they would do their damnedest to help him if he was hurt. That’s what being a professional is. If they didn’t, they would be guilty of the same thing he is: letting their bruised egos interfere with their duties.
132 Carlos Miller // Jun 17, 2009 at 4:22 PM

Kevin Camp,

I agree with you.
133 Davo // Jun 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM

Ego maniac cop who lies, is violent and puts peoples lives at risk. Fire him.
134 Ariel // Jun 17, 2009 at 7:39 PM

OK statute 21650.3: §21-650.3. Delaying, obstructing or interfering with emergency medical technician or other emergency medical care provider – Punishment.
Every person who willfully delays, obstructs or in any way interferes with an emergency medical technician or other emergency medical care provider in the performance of or attempt to perform emergency medical care and treatment or in going to or returning from the scene of a medical emergency, upon conviction, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six (6) months, or by a fine not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), or by both such fine and imprisonment.
Added by Laws 1990, c. 320, § 1, emerg. eff. May 30, 1990

In essence, the Trooper could not arrest the EMT at the stop, and once the EMT has said “patient” the Trooper was violating the law. I’m finding LEOs falling on both sides of this issue, but FDs and Ambulance Services are on the side of the EMT with qualifications. FD Association (sic) in OK points out that they normally run without siren/lights with heart patients to reduce anxiety, and that the EMT is responsible for the Unit.

The LEOs against the Trooper point out his rage, that the Ambulance did not fail-to-yield but did so in a reasonable way, that the gesture is something the Trooper has no right to react to and detain for, and that “patient” ends the stop immediately. There is no consensus within LE on this one.

(this is a comment which I have added to most of the posts on this incident, if you wish to comment go to the post regarding this story going national)
135 Jackson // Jun 18, 2009 at 12:09 AM

Where do you people see him joyriding with his wife? He’s obviously heading to a call at the gas station. The ambulance should’ve yielded to him since they weren’t running in emergency conditions.

That being said, what this officer did was way out of line and he should be disciplined, but he was within his rights to pull the ambulance over.
136 Carlos Miller // Jun 18, 2009 at 12:13 AM

Jackson,

It was mentioned in this article.

http://www.kjrh.com/content/news/2viewgc/story/OHP-chief-to-decide-troopers-fate/Myoi7Vffsk28uOg8o_NhXA.cspx
137 Raymond // Jun 18, 2009 at 7:03 AM

The cop should not be allowed to patrol the public arena with a vehicle or a firearm to enforce the law. He is irrational. He might be a racist, he might have rage problems, but he isn’t protecting and serving.

As for the tazer being lethal or non lethal- I would consider it non-lethal. I would also consider a baton, or a stick non-lethal, but people do die from injuries inflicted by sticks and batons. People die from ham sandwiches. Choking is a top cause of death.

No matter the status of tazers being lethal, or non-lethal; they are a great asset now that LEO’s commonly carry them. If you compare the potentially deadly effects of a tazer, with the potentially deadly effects of a 9mm, or .40 caliber bullet, its easy to see why tazers are a great thing for LEO toolbelts. If someone you know and love gets drunk or stupid and approaches officers with a knife, they no longer have to shoot them.
138 Kevin Camp // Jun 18, 2009 at 11:28 AM

Raymond,
No one has a problem with a police officer who uses a tazer on a drunk coming at him with a knife. People have a problem when police use tazers on college students who are asking questions, 72-year old great-grandmothers and 13-year old girls who won’t go to the principals office.
139 burke // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:34 PM

Heat exhaustion is not a medical emergency and why would an EMT have a camcorder, ready to go? It’s obvious they set up the good ole boy cop and are trying to frame him. Every black out there think he is an Obama and nobody has the right to tell them what to do. The cop has the final
say in any situation and EMT’s or others must obey their directives. An EMT can’t tell a cop what to do. This was a setup, pure and simple. By a white negro.
140 Michaelk42 // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:41 PM

@Carlos

If the stupid actually, physically BURNS, do you delete a comment like burke’s there?
141 Kylie // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM

Michaelk42 – LOL! If only stupidity hurt the stupid as much as it hurts the rest of us! But I’m hoping that burke is trying to be sarcastic/satirical and doesn’t actually believe all that.
142 Sassy // Jun 18, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Out*bleeping*rageous! State Trooper Martin is an ignorant hillbilly who clearly has no problem abusing his power. He acted like a 2-year-old having a temper tantrum. He obviously has no regard for anyone but himself (and his ego), including the patient in the back of the bus who had a right to prompt medical care, life threatening or not.
143 Carlos Miller // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:58 PM

Michael42,

Sometimes I prefer to let ignorance stand on its own.
144 Ariel // Jun 18, 2009 at 11:32 PM

Burke,
See my comment #134 citing OK statute. Then, please, please read for comprehension because a cop does not have final say in every situation. Look up the word “unlawful” too.

The video was by cellphone and cellphones with video capabilities are near ubiquitous .

Carlos, sometimes you do have to be cruel to be kind.
145 Pinandpuller // Jun 19, 2009 at 12:47 AM

I think that burke played a game when he was a kid called,”Cop, scissors paper.” Cop always won.

Drudge has a story up about a couple of DIA cops who thought that McDonald’s was taking too long with their breakfast. They flashed their badges then one brandished a gun at the drive through before driving off without paying. Kinda like the cop who pepper-sprayed the girl at the drive through who he wrongly accused of short-changing him.
146 Guy Bertram // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:01 AM

Thank you Carlos, don’t delete, let it sit there.

AND I would also like to thank Carlos AGAIN for this space and suggest to others that they also kick in a $fiver or more if they have it and want to help Carlos with his court costs.

TGIF!!!!
147 Evan P.B. // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:05 AM

i got three words for yall…

“FUCK THA POLICE!!”

5-0 is only getting more and more corrupt as time goes on. you give a homie power, 50% of the time he’s gonna abuse it.
148 jones // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:34 AM

Here are some contradictions I found between the EMT’s statement and the video.

#1 – He claims the officer did not have his siren, this would give an excuse to why the driver didn’t see him but the tape proves the siren was on.

#2 – He claims the officer got within 3 feet of the ambulance, this would suggest the officer was driving carelessly but the tape shows that did not happen.

#3 – He claims the officer made a remark over the radio when he passed him. I hear the siren on the tape and some radio traffic but you don’t hear the trooper say anything as he passes the ambulance. I don’t know how their system is set up so whether or not that would be picked up by the camera I don’t know, maybe he said it, maybe he didn’t.

#4 – He says when the trooper came up the second time he was running lights and sirens which again the tape shows is untrue.

#5 -He claims as they were pulling over the trooper pulled up next to them and motioned for them to pull over, again the tape proves this to be false

#6 -He claims he exited because he thought the woman in the police car was in need of medical attention but the tape shows he never even acknowledges she is there

#7 – He claims the officer greets the driver with “get your ass back here”, again untrue.

#8 – He claims after the loud knock on the ambulance door he was told he was under arrest. He then claims he was pulled out of the ambulance by the arm after informing the officers they had a patient. The tape clearly shows he exited the ambulance on his own and reported to the second officer that he had been assaulted. That is when they try to arrest him. When he claims he was pulled out by his arm he was not referring to trying to get back into the ambulance after the fight started as some of you seem to think. I’m pretty sure he wrote his report in chronological order.
149 Ariel // Jun 19, 2009 at 5:21 AM

So, jones, would you please spend the time showing us where, point by point, the Troopers report was inaccurate?

Thanks, look forward to it.
150 Kylie // Jun 19, 2009 at 10:10 AM

Since jones reposted here the exact comment he made on the 5/28 story, I’m reposting my response here as well. I will note that it appears he posted this here 9 hours after my response and hasn’t said anything else in the meantime. Can we say troll?

#1 – The EMT was not necessarily lying about it, he may have simply mistakenly believed that the officer was running without siren because he didn’t hear it. Or (more likely) he misremembered which of the two times that the trooper came up behind him was the time he had the siren on and which time he had it off.

#2 – He did not say the officer got within 3 feet. He said “The patrol car approached at such a high rate of speed…that he…was only a few feet from the rear of our unit…” The video clearly shows the trooper approaching at a high rate of speed to within less than 10 feet before he started pulling to the left, at the same time that the ambulance started pulling to the right. I would say that most people would consider that “a few feet”.

#3 – At approximately 13:56:21 on the dashcam video, the officer can be heard to say “I think you guys rear view mirror.” Granted this was approximately six seconds after the officer returned to the right hand lane from passing the ambulance, but I think that is sufficiently close to “as the trooper passed” as to be considered truthful to most people.

#4 – see #1 about siren.

#5 – You are correct, the trooper did not pull “alongside” the ambulance. However, it is impossible to ascertain from the video available whether or not the trooper motioned for the ambulance to pull over.

#6 – You are correct, he never directly acknowledges the woman in the car. He does however ask “what is the problem, what’s going on?” which neither proves nor disproves his statement about why he got out.

#7 – You are correct, the trooper didn’t say “get your ass back here”. But he did say “Now! HERE, NOW!” presumably while gesturing. This does not mean the EMT was lying. He may have misremembered.

#8 – The tape does *not* “clearly show” that he exited on his own, as both he and the trooper’s hand are off camera at the time. Now, I will grant that it *appears* that he *might* exit on his own, but it is not clear, and there is a possibility that the trooper pulled him by the arm initially.

Now, since you seem to be hung up on inconsistencies between the video and the written statements, why didn’t you give us a list of the inconsistencies with the trooper’s statement as well? Is it because then you might have to face the fact that the trooper is not 100% truthful, good and right?
151 jones // Jun 19, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Kylie,

#2 – Did you even read the statement? He says it in the first paragraph for crying out loud. It says “When the vehicle was approximately 3 feet from the ambulance’s rear bumper I called out to my partner to”

It even says it again under the “important points”. It says citizens are always advised to stay back…..it is impossible for the driver to see a vehicle traveling 2-3 feet behind one of the units.

#3 – Your right, he does say something after he passes him but I can’t make out what he is saying.

#5 – Your right you can’t tell from the video if he motioned for him to pull over, you can tell he didn’t even come close to pulling alongside him, even if he did motion for him to pull over who cares, he was after all pulling him over.

#6 – If he thought the woman was in need of medical attention when he exited the vehicle I don’t understand why he completely disregarded her. He exits the vehicle thinking she needs help, hears the trooper yell now, here now, and then determines she doesn’t need help? What if the trooper was yelling for the driver to get over here because the woman needed help. Technically if he thought she was in need of medical attention she is his patient and he completely ignored her, kinda the same thing the trooper did to the woman in the back of the ambulance.

#8 – The tape does clearly show he exited on his own. Not the dashcam but the first tape taken by a family member.

I don’t need to point out the inconsistencies in the trooper’s statements because the title of this article says video proves trooper is a liar, shouldn’t the author be the one pointing out the inconsistencies.

I’ve also read that he was going to back up other officers on some type of stolen vehicle run. If this is true then the only lie I see is the lie about him running lights and sirens to pick up his wife at the police station.
152 jones // Jun 19, 2009 at 10:44 AM

Kylie, will you point out the lies in the trooper’s story for me?
153 Kylie // Jun 19, 2009 at 11:26 AM

jones @ 151 –

#2 – Yes, I did read the statement. About 6 separate times. Which only goes further to prove my point about misstatements due to misremembering things. Because I reviewed the report several times, but when I read your list, I didn’t remember “3 feet” being in the report and missed it when I (this time) skimmed the report.

#5 – See above re: misremembering. And it only matters because you brought it up. I am pointing out that the video only shows part of the story, since only see one perspective in it.

#6 – Let me see if I can explain this in simple words. He does not determine that she doesn’t need help from the trooper yelling “here now”, he determines she doesn’t need help by the trooper’s response to “what is the problem?” If I were an EMT riding in an ambulance that a trooper pulled over and saw a woman in the passenger seat, I might think she needed medical attention. And I would get out and say something like “What is the problem?” because that is an all-encompasing…wait, I said I’d explain simply, let me rephrase…because that question can be used to ask a whole lot of other questions such as “Is someone ill? Is someone injured? Who? The woman in the car? You? What is the nature of the illness/injury? How did it happen?” You see, the question “What is the problem?” makes all of these questions unnecessary. If you still don’t understand this, then I recommend you go back to school to learn more about both verbal and non-verbal communication.

#8 – We were talking about the same video, and I still say it is not clear. Look at it again. The door blocks the view of the interior of the ambulance, the threshold of the ambulance, the EMT and the troopers hand. So it is not clear that the trooper did not pull the EMT out. It can be logically inferred that the EMT *likely* exited of his own accord, but it can also be logically inferred that the trooper *may have* pulled him by the arm before the EMT decided to move on his own. The video does not prove one way or the other.

Now, by your omitting rebuttal on any of the other points, I can only conclude that you are conceding to being wrong about them being lies.

And “I don’t need to point out the inconsistencies in the trooper’s statements because the title of this article says video proves trooper is a liar, shouldn’t the author be the one pointing out the inconsistencies.” is a cop-out (pun intended) since you originally posted this list of “inconsistencies” in another thread. And I have previously pointed out a few inconsistencies in the trooper’s statement, as well as previously pointed out you being wrong about some of these so-called inconsistencies in the EMT’s statement, but you choose to ignore that and continue to claim the EMT lied and the cop didn’t.
154 Kylie // Jun 19, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Oh, and jones, since you seem to need everything spelled out in simple words, I will say that I do not think that either the EMT or the trooper were necessarily intentionally lying. I think they both made a few misstatements, and I think that the trooper made more misstatements than the EMT did. I also do believe, based on the dash-cam video showing the original so-called “failure to yield”, which wasn’t a failure at all, and the demeanor (look it up if you don’t know the word) of both the cop and the EMT in the video, that the cop was the one that did ALL of the escalating, the EMT was only trying to deal with a person who was angry, irrational and keeping the patient from getting to the hospital. And that this was not a lawful stop, nor that the trooper’s orders to the EMT were lawful orders, and as such the EMT was legally right to resist.
155 Michaelk42 // Jun 19, 2009 at 12:11 PM

“#3 – He claims the officer made a remark over the radio when he passed him. I hear the siren on the tape and some radio traffic but you don’t hear the trooper say anything as he passes the ambulance. I don’t know how their system is set up so whether or not that would be picked up by the camera I don’t know, maybe he said it, maybe he didn’t.”

to

“#3 – Your [sic] right, he does say something after he passes him but I can’t make out what he is saying.”

I think this tells us more about jones than anything else.

How could anyone that was EVER a cop not know what it sounds like in a cruiser? Or not know that if the dashcam is picking up all the other ambient sound, that it’s going to pick up the officer speaking into the mic? System set up my arse.

This kid’s a troll, he’s either being intentionally disingenuous, or was never a cop… but based on this and prior comments, I bet more likely both.
156 Raymond // Jun 19, 2009 at 2:29 PM

@ Kevin Camp
Quote from your reply: “Raymond,
No one has a problem with a police officer who uses a tazer on a drunk coming at him with a knife. People have a problem when police use tazers on college students who are asking questions, 72-year old great-grandmothers and 13-year old girls who won’t go to the principals office.”

Everyone has a problem when an officer uses a tazer on seniors, kids that are disobeying in school, and college kids just speaking their mind in a peacefull manner because the constitution gives them a solid right to do so.

I’m just saying, that people shouldn’t look at tazers as the culprit. They save many many lives. Tazers can kill no doubt, but that is probably because of an occaisional shut down of the cns caused by the tazer; especially on people who have health conditions that can make them vulnerable.
Cops nowdays usually carry 9mm or .40 s/w caliber firearms. Those kind of bullets will annihalate the heart, or the brain, lungs liver, hit people in the spine somewhere and paralyze them etc… So giving LEO’s the alternative of using a tazer as a tool to take down a full grown man is good. Tazers have a proven track record of take down power, mace isn’t nearly as good as a tazer. Trust me i’ve taken both.

Then you see these cops who are irrational, or get angry and assault people and it really makes me think tazers are even better at protecting the common man from lethal harm.
157 jones // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:02 PM

Kylie,

#2 – Good, so we both agree this was an untrue statement. Would you agree that the trooper did nothing careless in the video as far as the first contact with the ambulance, he had lights and sirens on, waited for it to pull over before safely going around it? I don’t think he did anything wrong and was driving cautiously, however the EMT’s statement, if true, has the trooper driving recklessly.

#5 – I brought it up because the EMT said it in his statement and it obviously didn’t happen.

#6 – If it happened the way he said it happened I could see him thinking there was a medical emergency, if I was an EMT and a cop pulled along side of me with his lights and sirens and was waving for me to pull over I would think there might be a medical emergency. However, he didn’t pull along side of him waving at him and just a few moments ago that same cop, with the same woman in the car, not only passed him but also made a smart ass remark to him over the radio, so given that set of circumstances I don’t think a medical emergency would even cross my mind.

#8 – It is clear he didn’t pull him out. He exits and immediately approaches the second officer to claim the first officer assaulted him. What did the officer do pull him out and then let him go. It’s clear on the video but I can understand why you don’t want to admit it because it hurts your position.

Now, by your omitting rebuttal on any of the other points, I can only conclude that you are conceding to being wrong about them being lies.

I didn’t say they were lies, I said the video contradicts the statements. I agree that people can misremember the way things happen and a statement that is contradicted by video is not necessarily a lie. We will never know if he lied or just misremembered. I do find it odd that all of his inaccurate statements, if true, makes the trooper look worse.
158 Scott // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:11 PM

Good to see Jones is staying true to form and defending this turd eating troglodyte. Makes it real clear what kind of human being he is.
159 Guy Bertram // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:12 PM

TGIF! MichaelK42, I thought you did a GREAT job of summing up Jones earlier in this thread with THIS one, now we are just feeding a 13 year old troll.

“Then again, you’ve looked at video previously and claimed it didn’t show things it did, so I don’t have a lot of faith in anything you say anyway.

You’ve already demonstrated that a cop could probably eat a baby off the hood of his cruiser and you’d blame the baby for being so damn tasty.”

OK -Please POST/REPOST

“Until Trooper Martin is disciplined/retrained and apologies issued from the Oklahoma Governor’s office to White, the patient and her family, I continue to support Georgia Paramedic Hayden Barnes’s BOYCOTT of QuikTrips, ConocoPhillips, and Alamo and National Car Rental companies for us out of towners while we are

NOT driving through Oklahoma watching out for OHP and their wives running ambulances off the road on the way to stolen car reports (picking up his wife) and returning to illegally assault EMP.”
160 jones // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:18 PM

Mike, I watched the video and compared it to the statement. In his statement he said the cop made a remark “AS HE PASSED”. I didn’t hear what the trooper said because he didn’t say it “AS HE PASSED”. When Kylie pointed out he said something 10 seconds after he had already passed I went back and watched it again and he does say something but I can’t make out exactly what he says. Something about watching rearview mirror.

I didn’t think the EMT would make that up and that is why I offered a possible explanation of why it wasn’t heard on the video. Your right there are other sounds being picked up, maybe those sounds are louder then he was and that’s why it wasn’t picked up, I don’t know. Turns out I was right, again, he didn’t make it up, he just misremembered when it was said.
161 jones // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Guy and Mike, if you want to call me a troll instead of addressing the multiple misrememberings of the EMT then that says a lot more about you two.
162 Michaelk42 // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:52 PM

@jones

I thought Kylie et. al. did a great job of covering it already.

If you insist, however: minor inconsistencies in recalling a dramatic event aren’t the point. Even after supposedly watching the full video with all your attention you still admit to missing the trooper’s radio broadcast. I don’t see why you expect perfect recall from someone who underwent the stress of being threatened by an angry, armed person when you can’t even do that sitting there watching a video of the event.

And that’s still not even the point. Even if the EMT didn’t remember everything perfectly, or wasn’t 100% objective, which no one should expect him to be…

It still doesn’t make what the trooper did any less wrong, or any more justifiable.
163 jones // Jun 19, 2009 at 4:05 PM

Mike –

I wouldn’t call all of those minor inconsistencies, especially claiming you were pulled out of an ambulance as opposed to stepping out on your own. There were quite a few discrepancies for such a short video.

I didn’t hear any threats in there except the threat of being arrested.

Mike – And that’s still not even the point. Even if the EMT didn’t remember everything perfectly, or wasn’t 100% objective, which no one should expect him to be…

Now I’ve heard everything…
164 Nemo // Jun 19, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Well, Jones is demonstrating his unfamiliarity with Law Enforcement now. I can’t imagine anyone graduating from an Academy and being unfamiliar with the unreliability of eyewitness testimony.

The “fake crime in the classroom” bit has been done over and over, and few ever get all the facts right, and most get most of them wrong. In short, if the EMT’s memory varies from what’s on the video, it’s a normal human reaction, and not recessarily prevarication.

As for TASERs (Tom A Swift’s Electric Rifle), the problem with them is that their reputation as being non-lethat increases the likelihood of an officer to use it as a crutch, drawing and using it before (and more often than) they should, or using it for purposes it wasn’t intended for, like making people “respect” the cop, or for making them obey orders. Unlike the baton, it’s not a big, ugly weapon, and it doesn’t leave big, ugly marks that are hard to justify after the fact. I mind me of a video I recently saw, where a citizen made a couple mistakes at a traffic stop (he left his vehicle, and while heading back to it, put a hand part-way into his front jeans pocket – neither a good idea when dealing with a uniform). The cop on the scene went to his taser quickly (too quickly, IMO) and deployed it because his shouted commands weren’t obeyed. I’d call that at least a borderline use of the taser, because while the driver wasn’t in the right, he wasn’t acting aggressivly or threateningly. He was merely agitated. Instead of using verbal skills to manage the stop, the cop went for his taser, dropped the driver, and arrested him. Yay. The taser makes life easy for that cop – he didn’t have to listen to the driver, or do the difficult mental work required to maintain a calm traffic stop. He can just allow the situation to escalate until it reaches a justifiable level, then *zap*, cuff, and “Book ‘im, Dan-O!” The taser became a substitute for skill, professionalism, and proper attitude, and in such a way as to enable the cop to get away with it, probably for years to come. Yes, matters might have been worse if the cop hadn’t had a taser, but not as likely as all that. It’s not like police were dying in droves at traffic stops /before/ the taser was invented, after all.

The taser should only be used as a non-lethal (mostly) option of last resort and not as something to make the cop’s day easier, IMO.
165 Michaelk42 // Jun 19, 2009 at 5:18 PM

@jones

“Now I’ve heard everything…”

As Nemo so deftly points out, you would have heard about and had experience with the normal variance in witness testimony, if you were ever actually an officer.

Really, no human being is 100% objective. None of us are. So I would actually be more surprised if there were zero bias in any direction of anyone’s testimony/report.

@Nemo Thank $DEITY someone else remembers TASER is an acronym. “Tazer” annoys the crap out of me.
166 Raymond // Jun 19, 2009 at 5:47 PM

quote from NEMO: “The taser should only be used as a non-lethal (mostly) option of last resort and not as something to make the cop’s day easier, IMO.
”

I completely agree. It is disheartening to hear of all the misuses of the tasers. Tasers still do save lives every day. Every day there are police officers using tasers in a situation where without the taser, they’d probably have to use their gun. Tasers save lives; just because some LEO’s use them irresponsibly does not make the Taser a bad tool at all. It is a great tool, and the officers are to blame for any wrongdoing not the Taser. It’s something that should be nipped in the bud.
167 Kylie // Jun 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM

@jones -

ROFLMFAO! You’re killing me! ROFL! Really! It is obvious, as others have pointed out, that you can’t be a retired cop. But now with all your flip-flopping about what you are or aren’t saying, contradicting yourself then contradicting your contradiction, I can’t decide if you are, in fact, a 13-year-old troll sitting in mommy’s basement, or if you are a long-time politician! ROFL!
168 Zack // Jun 19, 2009 at 7:49 PM

“It is disheartening to hear of all the misuses of the tasers.”
169 Ariel // Jun 19, 2009 at 8:40 PM

Yep, I made the same points at #45, 54, and 55. For some it won’t sink in that the Taser is being used in ways it was not intended and should not be used. Really overused as a lazy “get compliance” technique by police who prefer not to sharpen their other skills.

And yes, Raymond, I would much rather be tasered than shot and ripped apart by the rounds they use today. But would they shoot me if I kept asking “why are you detaining me”? That use of the Taser does need to be nipped in the bud.
170 Nemo // Jun 19, 2009 at 9:12 PM

@Raymond

While I don’t dispute that tasers can and do save lives, I suspect that borderline misuse (I use that term guardedly, meaning that the situation in which the taser was deployed wouldn’t get the cop in trouble for doing so, but prior to tasers, said situation would have been resolved without lethal force or use of the baton, either.) is a lot more common than anyone realizes.

I hesitate to criticize a tool that is being misused, but IMO the taser is a tool that invites misuse, one that demands rigorous standards of training and oversight to prevent said misuse. Give a cop who thinks the public ‘must’ treat him with respect a taser, and you have made such occrances inevitable. If that type of officer is smart, then he need only subtly encourage agitated ‘perps’ to become more agitated in order to justify deploying the taser. Agitated people make mistakes, and so long as he doesn’t draw from that well too often, and is careful to avoid the kind of targets that bring media coverage, he can continue to tase without fear of punishment. That’s just one possibility. I’m sure you can think of others, if you try – cops who abuse their tasers repeatedly for one reason or another. The trouble with those bad apples, is that their techniques get talked about, and spread through the force they are on, until the time comes that even if the bad apple is removed (i.e. the habitual taser-user), the remainder have the groundwork laid to finessing the system, and only occasionally abuse it – say, every now & then, to make their lives a little safer, a little easier. Worse, they’ve been tased as part of the training, so it gets filed under “no big deal”. They might have a different notion of what a taser does, if as a part of their training they had to tase (for example) their wives, mothers, or children – and not only that, but without the target knowing that they were going to be tased, and in an agitated state, rather than a fully-prepared cop in a controlled environment.

A taser is a tool, and I agree a useful one. Unfortunately, the myth of its safety, its “harmlessness” IMO practically beg people to look at those who have been tased as little more than “whiners”, when the real question is whether the taser really was the last resort or the best choice. The police who do it don’t even need to be crooked, just a little lazy, a little sloppy, a little too full of themselves, a little too fearful – in short, human. I find that frightening.

Consider how you’d feel, if a police officer pulled a taser on you, and said (in essence) “you will obey any order I give you, instantly and without questioning, even if the orders didn’t make sense, or appeared to violate your rights”. They don’t say that, of course – they just pull the taser, start giving orders, and disregard any questions, and are prepared to drop your head onto whatever surface you are standing on, if you don’t obey. No, not all, but that is how I saw that traffic stop go down, and the cop’s actions and words were a little too assured, a litle too pat to make me think that this was the first time he’d done such a thing, and give me grave concern for how often that sort of thing goes on.

I apologize for going on at length, but I’m trying to be clear with how I view the situation. I’d love to discover that tasers were not used in such a way as a matter of course, but given human nature, police culture, and the myths surrounding the tool itself, I shan’t hold my breath.

@Michael:

Heh, flattery works every time. Thanks. Nice to know that my showing off on that one didn’t annoy /everyone/ here…
171 Michaelk42 // Jun 19, 2009 at 10:18 PM

@nemo – And in a bit of serendipity, a Canadian friend drops this my way tonight:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/06/19/bc-braidwood-inquiry-delay-rcmp-email.html

“The unexpected disclosure of a key email between senior RCMP officers has raised questions about officers’ testimony at the Braidwood inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski, resulting in a delay of the probe in Vancouver until September.

“The email between two senior RCMP supervisors suggests that the four Mounties who responded to a call at the airport discussed a plan to use a Taser against the Polish immigrant before they arrived.

“The four officers had already stated under oath at the inquiry that they had not discussed using the stun gun before arriving at the airport.

“The commission was scheduled to begin hearing closing arguments on Friday morning, but after learning of the email, commissioner Thomas Braidwood announced the inquiry will resume on Sept. 22, so the commission lawyers have time to review the email and conduct an investigation.

“I am obviously appalled,” a clearly upset Braidwood said.”

Oh, Canada. I had higher hopes for you guys.
172 Kylie // Jun 19, 2009 at 11:10 PM

@Nemo -
Thank you for posting your views on the use of tasers (#169). You have very eloquently summed up the problem I have with their use, or rather their misuse.

I have a suggestion for training officers on the effects of the taser during academy. Instead of having them standing, prepared, with someone on each side ready to catch them (I have seen several videos in which that was done), they should only be informed that sometime during academy they will be tased. Then when they are least expecting it (say, walking from one class to another, or while someone is talking to them), tase them and let them fall wherever they are. Then immediately start barking orders at them, like put your hands behind your back, or roll onto your stomach and put your hands on your head. Bet they’d have a totally different view of the taser’s effects than they do with the current training techniques!
173 Ariel // Jun 19, 2009 at 11:39 PM

Kylie,
You missed one thing. If they don’t immediately comply with those barked orders they get tasered again. Repeat as necessary.
174 The Arctic Fox // Jun 20, 2009 at 7:29 PM

This looks to me like a case of road rage.

The cop happened to feel like he was being obstructed on the way to his call (I am wondering if there was some department rivalry, perhaps some kind of race) and by the time he’d been beaten to the scene he was furious. Then he sees the ambulance go past, and whether or not the driver made any gesture, pulls out behind it and this happens.

That cop was out of control when he pulled the ambulance over, he was seeing red in road rage, and there is no excuse for it. Now he’s been caught out on camera, the department MUST take a stand against such disgraceful behavior. Not only should he be fired, but he should also be prosecuted for felony paramedic assault. There was no excuse for his behavior, none at all.
175 Michaelk42 // Jun 21, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Of course, while we’re on the acronym thing:

TASER of course is also (I’m sure) meant to inspire something of a link to LASER; Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation.

Unfortunately this allows for less positive backronyms such as:

Thug Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation

When it’s used as a lazy cop’s tool for easily forcing compliance.

Substitute “Torture” for “Thug” in extreme cases of misuse.
176 Pinandpuller // Jun 23, 2009 at 10:07 PM

Has anyone seen “The Hangover” yet?
177 Scott // Nov 10, 2009 at 11:49 PM

11/10/2009 9:44 PM Scott wrote:
I think the trooper could have handled things a little better, but the ambulance was not running in an emergency situation with his lights and siren on. This said he is just like any other vehicle on the road and MUST yield to emergency vehicles running with lights and sirens.
The main problem is this is a typical senario for Negros. They think they are above the law and have the mouth to back it up. It is typical for Negroes to gang up against any white person. They have no respect for law enforcement or any white person for that fact. If the man that got out of the back had of just kept his mouth shut, then the tropper would have allowed them to continue on with just a warning. The man from the back tried to push his title around with total disregard for the law. He would have been the first too make an issue of this if they have been running code and a car did not yield. And that goof ball with the camera, just trying to stir things up, needs to get a job and then he would not have been at home during the middle of the day trying to stir up trouble. There were several that needed to be arrested for assualting the trooper. Why were they not a work also.
Give the trooper a medal.
Reply to this
178 Ariel // Nov 11, 2009 at 1:08 AM

Are you really able to pack all that ignorance into 1.5 kg of brain? Like I side elsewhere some Americans are American only because they were born here, after that they are clueless and interchangeable with any of the other clueless around the planet. You’d be the same citizen in Zimbabwe or Croatia.
179 Sky Captain // Jan 8, 2010 at 2:30 AM

Wouldn’t happen here in North America-people believe that cops are tops, and must be obeyed no matter what-that’s why we have incidents like this. (Notice I said North America, and not just the United States.)
180 Sky Captain // Jan 8, 2010 at 2:42 AM

@Pinandpuller:

He should be a high school coach.

No thank you. I’ve already experienced having a LEO as a school principal, and it wasn’t great (he expected to be obeyed like he was some kind of god or something, no matter what.) I got into a few altercations with him myself, and I think that aside from being an ugly chimp, he was a shitty principal. I was glad when he left (that was long after I had left) the school, and I would hate to see this officer handle kids-it wouldn’t be amazing, that much I can tell you.
181 Bergman // Mar 12, 2010 at 5:10 AM

You have a patrol car dash cam recording an OHP trooper committing a felony. How can he still be working?
182 Bridgett // Apr 17, 2010 at 8:42 PM

Where is the petition? I want to sign it.
183 leftylou // Aug 18, 2010 at 8:35 PM

haters
184 leftylou // Aug 18, 2010 at 8:40 PM

these two knuckle heads probably had the same girlfriend in high school and still haven’t figured out who can piss further lmao the only thing that Trooper did wrong was not arrest that EMT for obstruction of justice!!!!

Photography is Not a Crime

It’s a First Amendment Right

Please donate to my Legal Defense Fund

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Testimonials

Recognition

Attorney blogs

Cop blogs

Cop watch blogs

First Amendment

Friends out West

Journalism Links

Photography Links

Videography Links

Help Fund PINAC (as well as pay off my extensive legal bills)