Mike Bennett arrest footage

[Fudwamper]

The cops who assaulted the casino ( yes, assaulted ) where Bennett was detained, they were responding to an ACTIVE SHOOTER event and were looking for the shooter. The cops who assaulted the Mandalay Bay were responding to an ACTIVE SHOOTER event and were looking for the shooter.

Does this help people understand why Bennett had a knee in his back and possibly a gun in his face and he was cussed at and disrespected and almost tossed into the back seat of a patrol car? ACTIVE SHOOTER. That's what the cops were told in both situations. I was asked earlier in the week if the cops could be "more polite" when dealing with Bennett, when they were responding to an ACTIVE SHOOTER report.

Does anyone get this?

I have yet to hear what the description of the active shooter was. Who were the police assaulting? We now know it was a rope stand. Who did the police think they were getting? Were the police just running in and randomly arresting people?

 

[Osprey]

I have yet to hear what the description of the active shooter was. Who were the police assaulting? We now know it was a rope stand. Who did the police think they were getting? Were the police just running in and randomly arresting people?

Pretty sure Rocket is using 'assaulting' in the military sense of moving in force on a fixed position, in this case the casino.
Don't claim to be an expert in LEO tactics, but my understanding is that their objective is to assess and eliminate any threat. According to LVPD, Bennett presented as a potential threat due to his behavior.

As far as the responding officers knew, they were responding to a shots fired / active shooter situation on an extremely busy night (due to the fight). The rope stand explanation was arrived at much later, bringing it up in this context is 20/20 hindsight.

 

[Mindsink]

Come on.. you guys are grasping at straws to string together an argument that is so conclusively biased it takes away from any opportunities to enact change.

Enact change? What change are you speaking of -- One of public perception towards police, or the other one based on a false narrative peddled by the left and the media?

 

[Rocket]

Hey Si... in your copious spare time, might you find the video that shows Bennett on the ground, in cuffs, with a gun pointed at his head.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Osprey]

Hey Si... in your copious spare time, might you find the video that shows Bennett on the ground, in cuffs, with a gun pointed at his head.

Thanks in advance.

[youtube]ggNikMTIgL8[/youtube]

[youtube]5ZI5XNHax78[/youtube]

Not sure if you're being facetious, but I believe the above covers all the available footage.

The Officer on the balcony does have a gun drawn while Bennett is on the ground. I'm pretty sure it's drawn before he has a view of the 2nd Officer handling the cuffing so doubtful it was being used for intimidation. At best Bennett's description appears to be a gross exaggeration.

The title of the 2nd video is prejudicial, but it does provide insight into the verbal techniques. It's only when Bennett is not complying that the Officer's tone is aggressive and language is salty. As soon as Bennett complies his tone is almost conciliatory. I think that supports my earlier assertion of a trained technique.

 

[Rocket]

I don't see the gun pointed at Bennett's head in either of Osprey's videos. The cop on the balcony/whatever is covering the whole Bennett.
BUT, Bennett claimed gun, then knee, then cuffs IIRC.

 

[StoneCold]

Since it doesn't show the entire process how can anyone definitively say what happened?

 

[Osprey]

Since it doesn't show the entire process how can anyone definitively say what happened?

I don't think anyone is claiming 'definitive' , just that the preponderance of the evidence suggests that Bennett exaggerated how he was treated.

At the risk of being repetitive:

1) There's a legit argument that even IF he had been treated exactly as he described, it's not outside the realm of acceptable behavior by a LEO in an active shooter situation.

2) Nothing in this scenario points strongly to racial animus. The majority of the casino patrons were black and the video appears to support that Bennett was detained due to his BEHAVIOR.

3) Bennett had adopted a cause PRIOR to this incident (as evidenced by both his protest demonstrations and letter to the league) and therefore had a MOTIVE to leverage and/or exaggerate this encounter.

 

[StoneCold]

Since it doesn't show the entire process how can anyone definitively say what happened?

I don't think anyone is claiming 'definitive' , just that the preponderance of the evidence suggests that Bennett exaggerated how he was treated.

At the risk of being repetitive:

1) There's a legit argument that even IF he had been treated exactly as he described, it's not outside the realm of acceptable behavior by a LEO in an active shooter situation.

2) Nothing in this scenario points strongly to racial animus. The majority of the casino patrons were black and the video appears to support that Bennett was detained due to his BEHAVIOR.

3) Bennett had adopted a cause PRIOR to this incident (as evidenced by both his protest demonstrations and letter to the league) and therefore had a MOTIVE to leverage and/or exaggerate this encounter.

I'll grant you 1 and 2 as I think it's likely there wasn't a racial element to this case. But I take issue with 3 as it assumes that Michael is callously taking advantage of the situation for his own benefit. Just as likely he's honestly reporting how it felt to be roughed up when he was innocent and his perception was that it was because he was black. What is unfortunate is that it will be perceived as self serving due to the way he phrased it as fact and not opinion. That and the lack of evidence that there was an overt racial component and that a gun was put to his head.

This case may turn out to be one where police brutality and race were not factors. It doesn't change the reality that the police are in a position of power and sometimes act in racist ways and mistreat and sometimes kill citizens of our country. And when they do we don't do a very good job of holding them accountable. Not all cops are bad, by far the majority are good people doing a difficult job, but with great power comes great responsibility.

 

[Osprey]

I'll grant you 1 and 2 as I think it's likely there wasn't a racial element to this case. But I take issue with 3 as it assumes that Michael is callously taking advantage of the situation for his own benefit. Just as likely he's honestly reporting how it felt to be roughed up when he was innocent and his perception was that it was because he was black. What is unfortunate is that it will be perceived as self serving due to the way he phrased it as fact and not opinion. That and the lack of evidence that there was an overt racial component and that a gun was put to his head.

This case may turn out to be one where police brutality and race were not factors. It doesn't change the reality that the police are in a position of power and sometimes act in racist ways and mistreat and sometimes kill citizens of our country. And when they do we don't do a very good job of holding them accountable. Not all cops are bad, by far the majority are good people doing a difficult job, but with great power comes great responsibility.

Doesn't this apply to Bennett as well? Is he not creating a perception that racial bias is the norm and not the exception? If even a rich and famous individual like him is treated as a 2nd class citizen, etc, etc.

I can't help but notice that a lot of police shootings start with some form of resisting arrest. Is the perception of injustice / bias feeding this reaction?

 

[hawk45]

I'll grant you 1 and 2 as I think it's likely there wasn't a racial element to this case. But I take issue with 3 as it assumes that Michael is callously taking advantage of the situation for his own benefit. Just as likely he's honestly reporting how it felt to be roughed up when he was innocent and his perception was that it was because he was black. What is unfortunate is that it will be perceived as self serving due to the way he phrased it as fact and not opinion. That and the lack of evidence that there was an overt racial component and that a gun was put to his head.

This case may turn out to be one where police brutality and race were not factors. It doesn't change the reality that the police are in a position of power and sometimes act in racist ways and mistreat and sometimes kill citizens of our country. And when they do we don't do a very good job of holding them accountable. Not all cops are bad, by far the majority are good people doing a difficult job, but with great power comes great responsibility.

I don't think Bennett is taking advantage. I do think he may be predisposed (perhaps justifiably so, I don't know his life experience) to see excessive force when what he really sees is officers trained to be overwhelming when neutralizing suspects who they believe may be armed or have committed a violent crime.

If his claims come to nothing I don't think it's unfortunate at all if he's perceived as self-serving. The cops involved have been painted as racist thugs by him, his attorney, his coach, and other players as a result of this. That *some* cops are bad doesn't make it okay to be wrong in a specific case. It damages the relationship between law enforcement and the black community further, it makes cops more hesitant to behave appropriately (i.e. overwhelming) with dangerous suspects, and it damages the reputations of cops who are making a pittance compared to Bennett to do a job that threatens their lives daily.

Always the caveat: we may uncover new evidence proving Bennett's case. Although as osprey repeats, and I've already said, if it went down precisely as Bennett said I don't see excessive force as a probable, or even likely determination. The cop can say "if I don't make it overwhelming to Bennett that I will shoot him if he moves, then in his panic he may move and get shot and that is a much worse outcome." And the cop would be correct. Even after Bennett is cuffed you can see them have to raise their voices a couple of times because in his panic he is becoming non-compliant.

 

[Osprey]

Since it doesn't show the entire process how can anyone definitively say what happened?

3) Bennett had adopted a cause PRIOR to this incident (as evidenced by both his protest demonstrations and letter to the league) and therefore had a MOTIVE to leverage and/or exaggerate this encounter.

I'll grant you 1 and 2 as I think it's likely there wasn't a racial element to this case. But I take issue with 3 as it assumes that Michael is callously taking advantage of the situation for his own benefit. Just as likely he's honestly reporting how it felt to be roughed up when he was innocent and his perception was that it was because he was black.

I used motive intentionally. If my ex-wife goes missing, I have plenty of motive to have done it. Doesn't mean I did, but I couldn't fault the police for asking questions.

 

[hawk45]

Doesn't this apply to Bennett as well? Is he not creating a perception that racial bias is the norm and not the exception? If even a rich and famous individual like him is treated as a 2nd class citizen, etc, etc.

I can't help but notice that a lot of police shootings start with some form of resisting arrest. Is the perception of injustice / bias feeding this reaction?

IMO life and death responsibility >>>>> any damage Bennett does to perception, and I'm one who will be pissed of there is damage to perception for no reason so I'm not letting Bennett off lightly for that if that ends up being the case.

As we see in the video, compliance is a HUGE factor as to how much force the police bring to bear. That is why the better studies dig into the police and witness reports to try and hang some sort of a compliance number on each case and control for that variable as well. What the suspect is doing at the time is the entire ball game to me in terms of whether or not police response was justifiable.

 

[hawk45]

I used motive intentionally. If my ex-wife goes missing, I have plenty of motive to have done it. Doesn't mean I did, but I couldn't fault the police for asking questions.

Do you think it's motive with Bennett or more predisposition due to his heightened sensitivity to excessive force given his prior political stand?

I don't deny it does constitute motive I just really struggle envisioning Bennett doing this for cynical reason. But hey I'm no ace Poker player and it's all speculation anyhow.

 

[Osprey]

I used motive intentionally. If my ex-wife goes missing, I have plenty of motive to have done it. Doesn't mean I did, but I couldn't fault the police for asking questions.

Do you think it's motive with Bennett or more predisposition due to his heightened sensitivity to excessive force given his prior political stand?

I don't deny it does constitute motive I just really struggle envisioning Bennett doing this for cynical reason. But hey I'm no ace Poker player and it's all speculation anyhow.

I doubt Bennett is that machiavellian, but I wonder who is in his orbit and how much influence they have on his communications. I don't think it's beyond politically motivated people to manipulate a man's passion even if it's against his best interest.

As an example, do you think it was coincidental that Nessa derailed Kaepernick's signing with Baltimore? He has more value to the 'cause' as a martyr than a back-up QB even if it might rejuvenate his career.

 

[Rocket]

do you think it was coincidental that Nessa derailed Kaepernick's signing with Baltimore? He has more value to the 'cause' as a martyr than a back-up QB even if it might rejuvenate his career.

A bit complex for Kaep, but I've been pointing out the girlfriend angle ever since the first knee.