Ray Roberts shares perspective on Michael Bennetts arrest

[ivotuk]

Ray Roberts is a really intelligent man, with a great perspective, and openness when it comes to discussing these issues.

Like I mentioned in the Gee Scott thread, this podcast blew me away. Try to "Open Your Heart" and be open to opinions that are not your own.

I can't remember verbatim, but this was an intuitive statement: "If you're listening to someone's viewpoint, and you can't wait to talk, your Heart's not open."

Basically, he's saying that people are not listening, because they're too busy thinking up how they're going to phrase their argument.


BOB, GROZ AND TOM -- Ray Roberts shares his perspective on Michael Bennett's police encounter

Former NFL offensive lineman Ray Roberts joins Bob, Groz and Tom to share his perspective on Michael Bennett's traumatic experience in Las Vegas.


http://sports.mynorthwest.com/category/ ... oz+and+Tom

 

[replicant]

I listened to the Ray Roberts podcast and enjoyed it, but one thing bothered me. He says we should open our hearts and listen, but he doesn't say we should listen to the LVPD version of the incident.
In their statement, the LVPD said:

Bennett was crouched behind a gaming machine around 1:30 a.m. Aug. 27 as a group of officers conducted a second sweep of the casino floor searching for a possible shooter, McMahill said. When officers saw Bennett, he ran outside and jumped a wall into traffic, where he was detained, the undersheriff said.
McMahill said officers thought Bennett may have been involved in the reported shooting.

Common sense tells you that if you act suspicious, police will treat you like a supect.

And this from the link:

McMahill said a supervisor explained the incident to Bennett at the scene. Bennett told the supervisor he understood and had no problem with what the officers did, except for having one officer aim a gun at his head, McMahill said.



Bennett went away that night apparently understanding why the police did what they did, but a week or two later decided to accuse the LVPD of racism.....Why?

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/loc ... etainment/

 

[SixSeahawk]

I listened to the Ray Roberts podcast and enjoyed it, but one thing bothered me. He says we should open our hearts and listen, but he doesn't say we should listen to the LVPD version of the incident.
In their statement, the LVPD said:

Bennett was crouched behind a gaming machine around 1:30 a.m. Aug. 27 as a group of officers conducted a second sweep of the casino floor searching for a possible shooter, McMahill said. When officers saw Bennett, he ran outside and jumped a wall into traffic, where he was detained, the undersheriff said.
McMahill said officers thought Bennett may have been involved in the reported shooting.

Common sense tells you that if you act suspicious, police will treat you like a supect.

And this from the link:

McMahill said a supervisor explained the incident to Bennett at the scene. Bennett told the supervisor he understood and had no problem with what the officers did, except for having one officer aim a gun at his head, McMahill said.



Bennett went away that night apparently understanding why the police did what they did, but a week or two later decided to accuse the LVPD of racism.....Why?

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/loc ... etainment/

You've never been in a situation where, after you thought about it, realized something completely different than your perception at the time was going on?

 

[replicant]

I listened to the Ray Roberts podcast and enjoyed it, but one thing bothered me. He says we should open our hearts and listen, but he doesn't say we should listen to the LVPD version of the incident.
In their statement, the LVPD said:

Bennett was crouched behind a gaming machine around 1:30 a.m. Aug. 27 as a group of officers conducted a second sweep of the casino floor searching for a possible shooter, McMahill said. When officers saw Bennett, he ran outside and jumped a wall into traffic, where he was detained, the undersheriff said.
McMahill said officers thought Bennett may have been involved in the reported shooting.

Common sense tells you that if you act suspicious, police will treat you like a supect.

And this from the link:

McMahill said a supervisor explained the incident to Bennett at the scene. Bennett told the supervisor he understood and had no problem with what the officers did, except for having one officer aim a gun at his head, McMahill said.



Bennett went away that night apparently understanding why the police did what they did, but a week or two later decided to accuse the LVPD of racism.....Why?

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/loc ... etainment/

You've never been in a situation where, after you thought about it, realized something completely different than your perception at the time was going on?

Maybe that happened, or maybe he thought that falsely accusing the LVPD of racism would fit right in to his current crusade. Would you consider that a possibility?

 

[StoneCold]

I listened to the Ray Roberts podcast and enjoyed it, but one thing bothered me. He says we should open our hearts and listen, but he doesn't say we should listen to the LVPD version of the incident.
In their statement, the LVPD said:

Bennett was crouched behind a gaming machine around 1:30 a.m. Aug. 27 as a group of officers conducted a second sweep of the casino floor searching for a possible shooter, McMahill said. When officers saw Bennett, he ran outside and jumped a wall into traffic, where he was detained, the undersheriff said.
McMahill said officers thought Bennett may have been involved in the reported shooting.

Common sense tells you that if you act suspicious, police will treat you like a supect.

And this from the link:

McMahill said a supervisor explained the incident to Bennett at the scene. Bennett told the supervisor he understood and had no problem with what the officers did, except for having one officer aim a gun at his head, McMahill said.



Bennett went away that night apparently understanding why the police did what they did, but a week or two later decided to accuse the LVPD of racism.....Why?

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/loc ... etainment/

You've never been in a situation where, after you thought about it, realized something completely different than your perception at the time was going on?

Maybe that happened, or maybe he thought that falsely accusing the LVPD of racism would fit right in to his current crusade. Would you consider that a possibility?

I choose to make no assumptions either way and will let the investigation play out, though I honestly doubt it will result in concrete findings one way or the other. In either case the important message to me is about the abuse of police authority, which, even if this case turns out not to be an example, there are plenty of others that are clear and show that we have a problem.

 

[hawksincebirth]

I listened to the Ray Roberts podcast and enjoyed it, but one thing bothered me. He says we should open our hearts and listen, but he doesn't say we should listen to the LVPD version of the incident.
In their statement, the LVPD said:

Bennett was crouched behind a gaming machine around 1:30 a.m. Aug. 27 as a group of officers conducted a second sweep of the casino floor searching for a possible shooter, McMahill said. When officers saw Bennett, he ran outside and jumped a wall into traffic, where he was detained, the undersheriff said.
McMahill said officers thought Bennett may have been involved in the reported shooting.

Common sense tells you that if you act suspicious, police will treat you like a supect.

And this from the link:

McMahill said a supervisor explained the incident to Bennett at the scene. Bennett told the supervisor he understood and had no problem with what the officers did, except for having one officer aim a gun at his head, McMahill said.



Bennett went away that night apparently understanding why the police did what they did, but a week or two later decided to accuse the LVPD of racism.....Why?

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/loc ... etainment/

The point of Bennetts issue is he had a civil servant point a gun to his head and threaten to blow it off. Is that standard arrest procedure ? Is it right or wrong to conduct yourself that way?

 

[hawk45]

I choose to make no assumptions either way and will let the investigation play out, though I honestly doubt it will result in concrete findings one way or the other. In either case the important message to me is about the abuse of police authority, which, even if this case turns out not to be an example, there are plenty of others that are clear and show that we have a problem.

I don't disagree we have a problem but I heartily disagree that facts don't matter as long as some important message gets reinforced.

"Hands up don't shoot" is another example of this. When the Washington Post - a sympathetic news outlet - reports based on the witness transcripts and trial proceedings that this was a complete fabrication and that the suspect was rushing an armed officer with fists raised, this is immensely damaging. This incident was and is pointed to as evidence of police racial animus or indifference. There will be many who agree that it still advances the cause because it "resonates" but it gives the impression that facts don't matter and provides an excuse to look at even legitimate incidents askance.

The argument that there are other instances isn't dispositive of anything; the question isn't that such abuses occur, but whether they occur at a higher rate to blacks per capita after adjusting for rates of criminality than they do to whites, and thus demonstrate some sort of targeting. Bennett is specifically implying a racial-based targeting from law enforcement. N instances of bad cops don't demonstrate that this is systemic.

There is evidence suggesting a disparity in the type and severity of force used on blacks by police, and that is legitimate grounds for discussion, but N=1 examples where the facts may not even point at racism do nothing but pollute the conversation. (Bennett very well may have been targeted, all I'm saying is it matters greatly whether he actually was or not).

 

[hawk45]

The point of Bennetts issue is he had a civil servant point a gun to his head and threaten to blow it off. Is that standard arrest procedure ? Is it right or wrong to conduct yourself that way?

If that happened, it's quite obviously wrong. "Don't move or I'll shoot" is appropriate when covering someone you still think might endanger other civilians. Putting a gun close to their head and threatening to blow it off is vicious and poor tactics.

 

[replicant]

The point of Bennetts issue is he had a civil servant point a gun to his head and threaten to blow it off. Is that standard arrest procedure ? Is it right or wrong to conduct yourself that way?

That was Bennett's initial problem with the arrest, but he has subsequently stated he was singled out for no other reason than being black, which is odd because there was reportedly many black patrons there that night.

As for the cop's conduct, he was trying to cuff a suspected gunman, a person who may have a gun. He reasonably wanted to make it clear to the suspect that it would be unwise to make any sudden moves.

As someone stated, let the investigation unfold, and if the LVPD is found to be full of racists as Bennett alleges, make them pay. The two cops involved were Hispanic btw.
On the other hand, if it is shown that Bennett intentionally set out to disparage the LVPD by saying they acted in a racist manner when he new perfectly well they didn't, then he would deserve all the scorn that he would receive.

 

[StoneCold]

I choose to make no assumptions either way and will let the investigation play out, though I honestly doubt it will result in concrete findings one way or the other. In either case the important message to me is about the abuse of police authority, which, even if this case turns out not to be an example, there are plenty of others that are clear and show that we have a problem.

I don't disagree we have a problem but I heartily disagree that facts don't matter as long as some important message gets reinforced.

"Hands up don't shoot" is another example of this. When the Washington Post - a sympathetic news outlet - reports based on the witness transcripts and trial proceedings that this was a complete fabrication and that the suspect was rushing an armed officer with fists raised, this is immensely damaging. This incident was and is pointed to as evidence of police racial animus or indifference. There will be many who agree that it still advances the cause because it "resonates" but it gives the impression that facts don't matter and provides an excuse to look at even legitimate incidents askance.

The argument that there are other instances isn't dispositive of anything; the question isn't that such abuses occur, but whether they occur at a higher rate to blacks per capita after adjusting for rates of criminality than they do to whites, and thus demonstrate some sort of targeting. Bennett is specifically implying a racial-based targeting from law enforcement. N instances of bad cops don't demonstrate that this is systemic.

There is evidence suggesting a disparity in the type and severity of force used on blacks by police, and that is legitimate grounds for discussion, but N=1 examples where the facts may not even point at racism do nothing but pollute the conversation. (Bennett very well may have been targeted, all I'm saying is it matters greatly whether he actually was or not).

Facts absolutely do matter which is why I'm waiting. Never intended to imply they didn't. I also don't think making false accusations helps at all, but it is going to happen. Just as police sometimes arrest innocent people. But I wouldn't let that distract me from the point of the protests which is their is an abuse problem.

There maybe a better way to protest, most any protest is going to rub someone the wrong way, at least this has gotten the conversation started and in a big way.

Progress will be small and incremental. A restructuring as you wrote in your other post is not realistic. But if a a few more cops, who are truly guilty, get sentenced or have punishments that are not a slap on the wrist, it will be a start. Better training that results in fewer abuses would also be good. Body cams may also prove important. I can't find the article, but I read that police wearing body cams reduced the number of abuse complaints. I'm sure as the conversation continues more small steps will be identified.

 

[hawk45]

StoneCold, would you support mandatory body cam activation for all police responses and disciplinary action for police who don't activate their cam unless they can prove tech failure or some other circumstance or reason that prevented it?

I think I might unless an LEO could explain to me how this wouldn't work.

If you're a good cop, this would prevent false claims. If you're a bad cop, you'd be caught and punished. If you're any cop you'd be extra careful not to violate civil rights in all cases. I'd wager I'd be an improved employee if I were being filmed all day long.

All of which would lead to safer cops and citizens. The only argument against might be one of cops hesitating more, and I don't want to increase risk for law enforcement for no reason, but it seems to me ample reason exists for this and the benefits far outweigh the negatives.

 

[NFSeahawks]

Why would the police lie? What would their motive be in that situation? The police report provided what happened.
Not that it matters but the cop didn't even know who Michael Bennett was. Cops only have only a moments notice to make a decision, between life and death. While I don't approve of cruel and unusual punishment if I was a cop and someone jumped a wall and ran from me I would have a hard time keeping my emotions in check when bringing them to the ground. Police are people too.

That being said, I do believe some cops are power hungry and lack the patience to do their job efficiently but you also must remember that at a moments notice they must be willing to put their life on the line. That would make me anxious as hell, so it would be hard to distinguish cops that were just doing their job from those actually going on a power trip.

 

[Mindsink]

The point of Bennetts issue is he had a civil servant point a gun to his head and threaten to blow it off. Is that standard arrest procedure ? Is it right or wrong to conduct yourself that way?

If that happened, it's quite obviously wrong. "Don't move or I'll shoot" is appropriate when covering someone you still think might endanger other civilians. Putting a gun close to their head and threatening to blow it off is vicious and poor tactics.

One can argue that it's just an extension of "don't move or I'll shoot". The basic premise is the threat of a firearm against non-compliance. In the end, he didn't shoot him, and he was released after 10 minutes of being held. So we're really just talking about his feelings being hurt, which to me, is a non-issue.

 

[hawk45]

The point of Bennetts issue is he had a civil servant point a gun to his head and threaten to blow it off. Is that standard arrest procedure ? Is it right or wrong to conduct yourself that way?

If that happened, it's quite obviously wrong. "Don't move or I'll shoot" is appropriate when covering someone you still think might endanger other civilians. Putting a gun close to their head and threatening to blow it off is vicious and poor tactics.

One can argue that it's just an extension of "don't move or I'll shoot". The basic premise is the threat of a firearm against non-compliance. In the end, he didn't shoot him, and he was released after 10 minutes of being held. So we're really just talking about his feelings being hurt, which to me, is a non-issue.

I think an argument that "don't move or I'll blow your head off" is an extension of "don't move or I'll shoot" could be workable.

The part I have difficulty with is approaching the suspect and putting the gun up to his head to deliver the threat instead of covering from a few feet away where the downed suspect has no chance at your weapon.

Then again as I read this:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...vegas-cop-threatened-to-shoot-him-in-the-head

I see that the threat was delivered as a 2nd cop was preparing to approach Bennett and cuff him. In that case, I understand the officer covering Bennett with the gun moving up closer to Bennett's head to emphasize the threat and also prevent a situation where the 2nd officer gets in his field of fire.

We don't know if all of this happened as Bennett described - I dearly wish the body cams were always on when responding to a situation - but even taking Bennett's account at face value I'm a bit doubtful there's enough to warrant a lawsuit, and perhaps not even enough to warrant disciplinary action. This was an active shooter scenario, or so they thought, and Bennett inadvertently acted suspiciously.

I actually think Bennett may have been acting intelligently by taking cover before he knew if there was a shooter and then fleeing when he could visually confirm a police presence, instead of running more quickly like the rest of the people seemed to. It's just unfortunate that this behavior also had a second more sinister interpretation.

 

[StoneCold]

StoneCold, would you support mandatory body cam activation for all police responses and disciplinary action for police who don't activate their cam unless they can prove tech failure or some other circumstance or reason that prevented it?

I think I might unless an LEO could explain to me how this wouldn't work.

If you're a good cop, this would prevent false claims. If you're a bad cop, you'd be caught and punished. If you're any cop you'd be extra careful not to violate civil rights in all cases. I'd wager I'd be an improved employee if I were being filmed all day long.

All of which would lead to safer cops and citizens. The only argument against might be one of cops hesitating more, and I don't want to increase risk for law enforcement for no reason, but it seems to me ample reason exists for this and the benefits far outweigh the negatives.

I am in favor of them until shown they have severe negative repercussions.There will be kinks and issues to work out, but more information will be good for everyone.

 

[Osprey]

One can argue that it's just an extension of "don't move or I'll shoot". The basic premise is the threat of a firearm against non-compliance. In the end, he didn't shoot him, and he was released after 10 minutes of being held. So we're really just talking about his feelings being hurt, which to me, is a non-issue.

It's not machismo or a lack of discipline, it's a trained technique. LEO are taught to overwhelm a potentially dangerous suspect and a verbal barrage is part of that. It's a natural reaction to freeze up when presented with overwhelming stimuli.

At the time MB was potentially a shooter fleeing a crime scene and was treated accordingly. Despite the title of this thread, he was not arrested, he was briefly detained and questioned.

 

[Rocket]

Are we seriously offended that the cop both cussed and acted aggressive? As was said above, the cops are trained to act aggressive. Another possibility for the aggression was to get some cuffs around this 6'4 280 muscular gentleman and the cop was alone, rather than this being a black thing. Overwhelm with a verbal barrage, especially when the suspect is rather large.

 

[Rocket]

I wrote this for a Producer I know, in another forum... I believe it applies. the specific issue was raised above.

Kaep, like Tommy and Cassius, were protesting the inequality between whites and non-whites, and within said inequality Kaep was protesting the deaths of black people at the hands of police.

Within that limitation, the deaths of black people at the hands of the police, I give you my thoughts on the death of Big Mike Brown in Ferguson MO.

As I recall (completely/totally from memory) , Big Mike and a friend of his robbed a convenience store of some popular small tobacco products. The storekeeper saw the theft and attempted to stop the two alleged criminals and Big Mike pushed him into a display at the door. This became an alleged strong arm robbery and made the petty shoplifting into a felony.

It seems the storekeeper called the cops cuz there was a report on the radio listing the crime and general description. The cop saw the two walking down the middle of the street and told them to get on the sidewalk. They ignored him. He passed them and turned to block the street. Words were exchanged and the cop started to get out of his car and Big Mike pushed the car door into the cop. A struggle ensued and Big Mike caused the cops firearm to discharge. The cop then shot Big Mike and Big Mike retreated, then turned back toward the cop and “charged” toward him, then the cop killed Big Mike.

The friend claimed Big Mike had his hands over his head surrendering when shot the second time, but this was disproven by several onlooker statements, most of them from black people. There were three separate autopsies, the regular one, an independent one and one by the family/lawyer and they all supported the facts as I recall them, if I recall them correctly.

As I see it, even if the tobacco product theft was the wrong guy and the video was incorrect, which I don’t think it was, it’s reasonable for a cop to ask someone to get out of the street, they’re for cars, and it’s reasonable to get out of the car to ask for ID given the recent theft.

Once Big Mike reached for the cops gun then he became a threat, both to the cop and to the community, even before the discharge. This is supported by case law and even the Supremes, both in the cop discharging his weapon and in killing Big Mike when he turned and began moving back to the cop.

Let’s go hypothetical. In the abstract, how should cops handle someone who fits the description of a violent felon? Big Mike wasn’t killed over a couple of {cigars?}, he was killed because a cop felt his life or a citizens life was in danger AT THE TIME – the Supreme Court decided the whole “AT THE TIME” thing.

If you differ, then how would you suggest it be handled when the cop investigates someone suspected of a violent crime, who then gets aggressive and assaults the cop and gains control of the cops firearm?

 

[Sports Hernia]

The point of Bennetts issue is he had a civil servant point a gun to his head and threaten to blow it off. Is that standard arrest procedure ? Is it right or wrong to conduct yourself that way?

That was Bennett's initial problem with the arrest, but he has subsequently stated he was singled out for no other reason than being black, which is odd because there was reportedly many black patrons there that night.

As for the cop's conduct, he was trying to cuff a suspected gunman, a person who may have a gun. He reasonably wanted to make it clear to the suspect that it would be unwise to make any sudden moves.

As someone stated, let the investigation unfold, and if the LVPD is found to be full of racists as Bennett alleges, make them pay. The two cops involved were Hispanic btw.
On the other hand, if it is shown that Bennett intentionally set out to disparage the LVPD by saying they acted in a racist manner when he new perfectly well they didn't, then he would deserve all the scorn that he would receive.

So only us white folks can be racist??? Good to know.

 

[Sports Hernia]

I wrote this for a Producer I know, in another forum... I believe it applies. the specific issue was raised above.

Kaep, like Tommy and Cassius, were protesting the inequality between whites and non-whites, and within said inequality Kaep was protesting the deaths of black people at the hands of police.

Within that limitation, the deaths of black people at the hands of the police, I give you my thoughts on the death of Big Mike Brown in Ferguson MO.

As I recall (completely/totally from memory) , Big Mike and a friend of his robbed a convenience store of some popular small tobacco products. The storekeeper saw the theft and attempted to stop the two alleged criminals and Big Mike pushed him into a display at the door. This became an alleged strong arm robbery and made the petty shoplifting into a felony.

It seems the storekeeper called the cops cuz there was a report on the radio listing the crime and general description. The cop saw the two walking down the middle of the street and told them to get on the sidewalk. They ignored him. He passed them and turned to block the street. Words were exchanged and the cop started to get out of his car and Big Mike pushed the car door into the cop. A struggle ensued and Big Mike caused the cops firearm to discharge. The cop then shot Big Mike and Big Mike retreated, then turned back toward the cop and “charged” toward him, then the cop killed Big Mike.

The friend claimed Big Mike had his hands over his head surrendering when shot the second time, but this was disproven by several onlooker statements, most of them from black people. There were three separate autopsies, the regular one, an independent one and one by the family/lawyer and they all supported the facts as I recall them, if I recall them correctly.

As I see it, even if the tobacco product theft was the wrong guy and the video was incorrect, which I don’t think it was, it’s reasonable for a cop to ask someone to get out of the street, they’re for cars, and it’s reasonable to get out of the car to ask for ID given the recent theft.

Once Big Mike reached for the cops gun then he became a threat, both to the cop and to the community, even before the discharge. This is supported by case law and even the Supremes, both in the cop discharging his weapon and in killing Big Mike when he turned and began moving back to the cop.

Let’s go hypothetical. In the abstract, how should cops handle someone who fits the description of a violent felon? Big Mike wasn’t killed over a couple of {cigars?}, he was killed because a cop felt his life or a citizens life was in danger AT THE TIME – the Supreme Court decided the whole “AT THE TIME” thing.

If you differ, then how would you suggest it be handled when the cop investigates someone suspected of a violent crime, who then gets aggressive and assaults the cop and gains control of the cops firearm?

Well for starters I would suggest the cop in question have his badge cam ON! I cannot wait to hear what his punishment will be for not having it on (it's going to be a slap on the wrist).

The most important part of that situation wasn't recorded by the badge cam which would go a long way to clarifying what happened. I would LOVE to hear the audio alone.

This country is sliding down the slippery slope of becoming a police state and has been heading that way for awhile now. I'm not stating that MB was completely in the right or has his facts 100% correct. I wasn't there, but I'm not an innocent man of color being wrongfully detained fearing for my life with the adrenaline flowing either.