Freedom Hating Brit Beaten up by US Cops for Crossing Road

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

Really? I wonder why? I simply can't believe that the Daily Mail would have an agenda on the matter.

:laugh4:

---

OT, but is this one any better?
The BBC's commitment to bias is no laughing matter
or
this?

I don’t think the department approves of “moonlighting” and I think it is illegal for police to have some off duty jobs, like as a bouncer. I could be wrong. :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Fairness bids me to link to the police report, which contrary to a link I previously quoted from, states that it was a uniformed police officer.

The police overreacted. But this professor does strike me as a belligerant arse. He may hold whatever opinion he wants on jaywalking, but if the law in some foreign country says you can't, than for bleeding's sake just abide by that.

---

Two wrongs don't make a right but sometimes they do make a hell of a story. :2thumbsup:

which is probably why they are seen as desirable employees for other unofficial security jobs. However, one cannot simply take on a second job without officially requesting in writing to their department supervisor working that off duty job.

Quote:

---

but I find this incredible. The scope for conflicts of interest between the new employer and the public is immense and it is no good saying that it is checked by the department supervisor. Who is he working for in his spare time?

---

Quote:

---

I don’t think the department approves of “moonlighting” and I think it is illegal for police to have some off duty jobs, like as a bouncer. I could be wrong.

---

Hence the written request requirement, and don't think it stops at a lower management position, you think some Facility Captain will risk his career by okaying an employment request that goes against strict Department guidelines? There are Department guidelines that apply, bar room bouncer, liquor store employee are a few of the definite no nos. Many off duty cops and some of my fellow corrections officers work the sports stadium security jobs, most just have self-employed businesses in the building trades, lawn care, car dealers, etc... The off duty jobs can't interfere, timewise, with ones primary job, any such problems that do arise you will be required to quit the off duty job or get fired. To me, the money gained from such a secondary job involving a security position is not worth the risk.

Quote:

---

Many off duty cops and some of my fellow corrections officers work the sports stadium security jobs

---

What do they do if their employers are flouting safety laws. Do they go and arrest the bosses or do they turn a blind eye? When working for a sports stadium, who decides what are the priorities for enforcement, the stadium bosses or the police officer? Do they concentrate on crowd control or stop this work to arrest people for breaking the law? As I said, the opportunity for conflicts of interest are huge.

Quote:

---

Facility Captain will risk his career by okaying an employment request that goes against strict Department guidelines?

---

Unfortunately reduces, but does not remove the possibility of conflicts of interest or out and out corruption.

Quote:

---

most just have self-employed businesses in the building trades, lawn care, car dealers

---

This is less problematic, especially if the work is done for friends and acquaintances and not people who turn out to be nephews of the local crime boss. This sort of thing does happen in the UK In the 70's when police pay was poor, it would have been very common amongst police constables with families who needed to make ends meet and the shift pattern made it easy to do a few days work on friends cars and gardens. Now pay is better, it happens less. Whilst open to abuse, this is not nearly as worrying as working for businessmen who may (even if most don't) take advantage.

Here's Professor Fernandez-Armesto's considered viewpoint on his experience. Try to read it all without frothing at the mouth. :wink:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Felipe Fernandez-Armesto: The accidental criminal

Arrested, beaten and jailed by police in Atlanta for crossing a road in an illegal manner, the British historian and writer reflects on his shocking ordeal - and what it reveals about the US

Published: 13 January 2007

"No one truly knows a nation," said Nelson Mandela, "until one has been inside its gaols." Last week, after living in the USA for more than a year without understanding the country, I acquired - briefly - a gaolbird's authority. I can now share insights you can only get from being assaulted by the police and locked up for hours in the company of some of the most deprived and depraved dregs of the American underclass.

For someone like me - a mild-mannered, middle-aged professor of scholarly proclivities, blameless habits, and frail physique - it was shocking, traumatising and deeply educational. It all started on my first morning in Atlanta, Georgia, where I was attending the annual conference of the American Historical Association. Unwittingly, I crossed a street at what I later learnt was an unauthorised crossing. I had seen plenty of pedestrians precede me. There was no traffic in sight and no danger to me or anyone else.

Apparently, however, as I was later told, "jaywalking" is a criminal offence in the State of Georgia. But I had no idea I had done anything wrong.

A young man in a bomber jacket accosted me, claiming to be a policeman, but with no visible evidence of his status. We got locked in mutual misunderstanding, demanding each other's ID. I mistook the normal attitude of an Atlanta cop for arrogance, aggression and menace. He, I suppose, mistook the normal demeanour of an ageing and old-fashioned European intellectual for prevarication or provocation.

His behaviour baffled me even before he lost patience with me, kicked my legs from under me, knocked my glasses from my nose, wrestled me to the ground, and with the help of four or five other burly policemen who suddenly appeared on the scene, ripped my coat, scattered my books in the gutter, handcuffed me, and pinioned me painfully to the concrete.

I was bundled into a filthy paddy-wagon with some rather unsavoury-looking fellow-prisoners and spent eight hours in the degrading, frightening environment of the downtown detention centre, with no humiliation spared: mugshot, fingerprinting, intrusive search, medical examination, and the frustration of understanding nothing: neither why I was there, nor how I might get out.

Had I made it to my historical conference, I might have learnt about medieval pumpernickel-production or 17th-century star-gazing. Instead, I discovered a lot about contemporary America.

First, I learnt that the Atlanta police are barbaric, brutal, and out of control. The violence I experienced was the worst of my sheltered life. Muggers who attacked me once near my home in Oxford were considerably more gentle with me than the Atlanta cops. Many fellow historians at the conference, who met me after my release, had witnessed the incident and told me how horrific they found it. Even had I really been a criminal, it would not have been necessary to treat me with such ferocity, as I am very obviously a slight and feeble person. But Atlanta's streets are some of the meanest in the world, and policing them must be a brutalising way of life.

Once in gaol I discovered another, better side of Atlanta. The detention centre is weird - a kind of orderly pandemonium, a bedlam where madness is normal, so that nothing seems mad. It's windowless, filthy, and fetid, but strangely safe, insulated and unworldly: like Diogenes's barrel, a place of darkness conducive to thought - for there is nothing else to do in the longueurs between interrogations, examinations, and lectures from the sergeant in charge about the necessity of good behaviour.

Some raffish underworld characters befriended me, but so did the detention centre personnel.

In gaol, I saw none of the violence that typifies the streets. On the contrary, the staff treat everyone - including some of the most difficult, desperate, drunk, or drugged-out denizens of Atlanta's demi-monde - with impressive courtesy and professionalism. I began to suspect that some of the down-and-outs I shared space with had deliberately contrived to get arrested in order to escape from the streets into this peaceable world - swapping the arbitrary, dangerous jurisdiction of the cops for the humane and helpful supervision of the centre. Nelson Mandela, I think, was right to say that gaol is the best place to make judgements from because, "a nation should be judged not by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest." If Atlanta is representative, America, by that standard, comes out commendably well.

I then met the best of America when I appeared in court. Everyone, including the judge himself and the wonderful vice-president of the American Historical Association, who accompanied me to lend moral support, told me to get counsel to represent me. A lawyer I had consulted hurriedly that morning had advised me to sue the city. But I had no stomach for such a hostile and elaborate strategy. Instead, I watched Judge Jackson at work. He had 117 cases to try that day. He handled them with unfailing compassion, common sense and good humour.

I noticed that my charge as the judge read it - "failing to obey a police officer and obstructing the police" - did not match the semi-literate scrawl the accusing officer had scribbled on my citation: so I reckoned that, if necessary, I could get the charges dismissed on those grounds alone. Meanwhile, I simply appealed to the wisdom and mercy of the judge.

It only took him a few minutes to realise that I was the victim, not the culprit. The prosecutors withdrew the charges. The judge then proclaimed my freedom with kindly enthusiasm and detained me for nothing more grievous than a few minutes' chat about his reminiscences of the Old Bailey.

The first lesson is obvious. The city authorities of Atlanta need to re-educate their police. I can understand why some officers behave irrationally and unpredictably. Much of the downtown environment in their city is hideous - inoffensive to the eye only when shrouded by the often-prevailing fog. The sidewalks are thronged with beggars who can turn nasty at night. The crime rate is fearful.

The result is that the police are nervy, jumpy, short-fused, and lacking in restraint, patience or forbearance. But witnesses tell me that up to 10 officers took part in the assault on me. This is evidence not only of excessive zeal, but of seriously warped priorities. In a city notorious for rape, murder and mayhem the police should have better things to do than persecute jaywalkers or harry an impeccable, feeble foreigner.

Moreover, Atlanta depends on its convention trade. The way the conventions centre is designed is extremely practical. There is plenty of good, reasonably priced accommodation. But if Atlanta continues to accumulate a reputation for police frenzy and hostility to visitors, the economy will crumble.

At least, the police need to be told to exercise forbearance with outsiders - especially foreigners - who may not understand the peculiarities of local custom and law.

But, at the risk of projecting my own limited experience on to a screen so vast that the effect seems blurred, I see bigger issues at stake: issues for America; issues for the world. I found that in Atlanta the civilisation of the gaol and the courts contrasted with the savagery of the police and the streets. This is a typical American contrast. The executive arm of government tends to be dumb, insensitive, violent and dangerous. The judiciary is the citizen's vital guarantee of peace and liberty.

I became a sort of exemplar in miniature of a classic American dilemma: the "balance of the constitution", as Americans call it, between executive power and judicial oversight.

I have long known, as any reasonable person must, that the courts are the citizen's only protection against a rogue executive and rationally uncontrolled security forces.

Though my own misadventure was trivial and - in perspective - laughable, it resembles what is happening to the world in the era of George W Bush. The planet is policed by a violent, arbitrary, stupid, and dangerous force.

Within the USA, the courts struggle to maintain individual rights under the bludgeons of the "war on terror", defending Guantanamo victims and striving to curb the excesses of the system. We need global institutions of justice, and judges of Judge Jackson's level of humanity and wisdom, to help protect the world.

I feel happy and privileged to be able to live and work in the United States. On the whole, in my work as an historian, I have argued consistently that America has had a benign influence on the world. The growth of anti-Americanism fills me with despair, as I see ordinary, decent, generous Americans getting the blame abroad for the follies of the American government and the crudities of the American image.

I hope that if some good ensues from my horrific misfortune, it will include more future security from police misconduct for visitors in Atlanta, and more awareness in the world of some of the virtues - as well as some of the vices - of US life.

So google-imaging the guy, is this he?
https://jimcee.homestead.com/Felipe_...ez-Armesto.jpg

or this:
https://jimcee.homestead.com/Filip2.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KukriKhan

or this:
https://jimcee.homestead.com/Filip2.jpg

---

This is Felipe.

Well I can see how he might rub people up the wrong way but I have to agree with him that the Police grossly overreacted, five officers and having his legs kicked out from under him is too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

Here's Professor Fernandez-Armesto's considered viewpoint on his experience. Try to read it all without frothing at the mouth. :wink:

---

Videos of him talking about the incident are on YouTube.

Who would be afraid of that guy?
That officer should grow some cojones if he was afraid that this guy could be a danger to him.:sweatdrop:
Of course I understand that anyone who walks across a street towards a building is obviously a terrorist and should either be shot or sent to Guantanamo so the officer really went the subtle way and his neverending courage and mercy should be applauded.

Apart from that, when an officer tells you something you better do it, you are not supposed to think, you are a robot, discussion is for terrorists.:dizzy2:

I know german drivers like to discuss when they are about to receive a speeding ticket, but I have never heard about a police officer beating them up for it, not even after a series of police murders which happened under such circumstances. Maybe Atlanta has so much crime because it's police officers only police the convention centers and people in suits instead of the ghettos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Felipe

For someone like me - a mild-mannered, middle-aged professor of scholarly proclivities, blameless habits, and frail physique - it was shocking, traumatising and deeply educational.

---

Heh, he turned it into a learning experience.

Respect !

It doesn't speak well for the Policeman's ability to solve crime, consider what he did with what he should have seen.

Slight middle-aged man.

Well dressed and turned out.

Old-fashioned glasses.

Carry papers and books.

Foriegn accent.

The Policeman should be able to put all that together and realise he's A. a low threat and B. probably a visiting proffessional.

you know ive read this entire thread and not one person made the "Why did the Enlgish proffessor cross the road?" joke!

shame on you all

:laugh4:

I've read the entire thread and am trying to work out why he hates freedom? Surely crossing the road where he saw fit means he loves freedom.

More importantly - why do you hate freedom so much Talbot?

:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by therother

Videos of him talking about the incident are on YouTube.

---

Seeing him talking just reminded me of Rowley Birkin QC.

Quid

Hang on there. I say our esteemed mister Fernandez-Armesto plays the role of a 'mild-mannered, middle-aged professor of scholarly proclivities and blameless habits' a bit too much for my liking.
Yes, there was excessive use of force. But he forgets that he himself could at any moment have de-escalated the situation. Indeed, prevented it by simply abiding by the local law.

It was his indignation over a US police officer - a young man in a bomber jacket no less! - being so 'barbaric and brutal' to treat a stiff upper-lipped English gentleman the same as a commoner that got him into this mess.

Between all his outrage he doesn't seem to realise that his indignancy over the APD roughing up an 'ageing and old-fashioned European intellectual' implies that they apparantly should reserve this kind of treatment to young, uneducated Afro-Americans.

Small wonder he still doesn't understand America after having lived there for a over a year, if he doesn't even realise that the place had a revolution centuries ago just to end this kind of typically British upper-class demand for special treatment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quid

Seeing him talking just reminded me of Rowley Birkin QC.

Quid

---

I wonder if he was very, very drunk as well? :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Hang on there. I say our esteemed mister Fernandez-Armesto plays the role of a 'mild-mannered, middle-aged professor of scholarly proclivities and blameless habits' a bit too much for my liking.
Yes, there was excessive use of force. But he forgets that he himself could at any moment have de-escalated the situation. Indeed, prevented it by simply abiding by the local law.

It was his indignation over a US police officer - a young man in a bomber jacket no less! - being so 'barbaric and brutal' to treat a stiff upper-lipped English gentleman the same as a commoner that got him into this mess.

Between all his outrage he doesn't seem to realise that his indignancy over the APD roughing up an 'ageing and old-fashioned European intellectual' implies that they apparantly should reserve this kind of treatment to young, uneducated Afro-Americans.

Small wonder he still doesn't understand America after having lived there for a over a year, if he doesn't even realise that the place had a revolution centuries ago just to end this kind of typically British upper-class demand for special treatment.

---

I like your summation of the event and media attention afterwards.

Loius has a point, unfortunately English intellectuals are like that, he still presented no threat and his indignation did not warrant the treatment he recieved. If Atlanta's Police have tollerance that low then they need to seriously re-think their recruitment policy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Hang on there. I say our esteemed mister Fernandez-Armesto plays the role of a 'mild-mannered, middle-aged professor of scholarly proclivities and blameless habits' a bit too much for my liking.
Yes, there was excessive use of force. But he forgets that he himself could at any moment have de-escalated the situation. Indeed, prevented it by simply abiding by the local law.

It was his indignation over a US police officer - a young man in a bomber jacket no less! - being so 'barbaric and brutal' to treat a stiff upper-lipped English gentleman the same as a commoner that got him into this mess.

Between all his outrage he doesn't seem to realise that his indignancy over the APD roughing up an 'ageing and old-fashioned European intellectual' implies that they apparantly should reserve this kind of treatment to young, uneducated Afro-Americans.

Small wonder he still doesn't understand America after having lived there for a over a year, if he doesn't even realise that the place had a revolution centuries ago just to end this kind of typically British upper-class demand for special treatment.

---

Bravo, Mr. Louis VI the gravitationally privledged. Fernandez coaxed it out of the cop. He refused to listen, looked down upon him and he got his just deserts. What do you expect when a criminal fails to halt and obey an officer of the peace. Obviously his knee's are just fine so the cop knew what he was doing when he halted Fernandez. Next time he should not run/walk from police when told to stop. He would also be wise to listen to the cop who tell's him about the law. Breaking it after that is ubsurd.

He also seem's to think he deserves better treatment then other's. That is just plain wrong, and I'm quite happy he was sent to jail for a bit.

Again bravo Louis VI the gravitationally priviledged.

So he deserved to be beaten?

He crossed the road, then was told, he was walking away, didn't realise it was a policeman.

Get off your high horse. Okay, so he's definately old fashioned and he may even be a prigg, but I doubt it. You on the other hand seem to be attacking him because he is English and Upper-Middle Class, seems like a bit of post-colonial prejudice is left over.

In Britain a Policeman would say, "Sir, you cannot cross there." He would not shout it from the other side of the street. Make fun of saying "sir" but it's there for a reason. In Britain if someone calls you "Sir" and you're not in uniform or a resturant/hotel he/she is a Policeman, you can tell even without seeing them.

Quote:

---

So he deserved to be beaten?

---

Beaten? When was he beaten? He was put to the ground when he failed to listen to the officer. He's been here for a year, he knows what cops dress like. There's no excuse for turning and walking away when an officer tell's you to stop.

Yep, it is quite clear that the individual deserved a beating (for want of a better term), hours in detention and time in court for crossing the road. What a terrible waste of everyone's time.

About abiding local law, who of you reads each and every book of law before going somewhere else?
I don't even know all german laws, some countries have laws you could never imagine(like jaywalking being forbidden, before this thread I have never even come across the word jaywalking) so do you really think that every person being in a country should know each and every law? And those who have ever copied a copyrighted CD in an illegal way should keep out of this anyway.~;)

There was this...erm...those of you without fault shall throw the first stone.
I'm not saying the police officer was wrong in stopping the man, but beating him up or kicking him to the ground was just too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

About abiding local law, who of you reads each and every book of law before going somewhere else?
I don't even know all german laws, some countries have laws you could never imagine(like jaywalking being forbidden, before this thread I have never even come across the word jaywalking) so do you really think that every person being in a country should know each and every law? And those who have ever copied a copyrighted CD in an illegal way should keep out of this anyway.~;)

There was this...erm...those of you without fault shall throw the first stone.
I'm not saying the police officer was wrong in stopping the man, but beating him up or kicking him to the ground was just too much.

---

The police officer was right to stop him for breaking the law. He was also right to beat him up for being a stuck-up English ****. It ws out of order to combine the two though. What he should have done was show his badge, arrest the professor, taken him to the station, and issued a fine. Then he should have discarded his badge, followed the professor out of the station, and beaten him up on the street. That would have been in order, almost a civic cuty.

An unusually foolish thing to say, even in jest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigTex

Bravo, Mr. Louis VI the gravitationally privledged. Fernandez coaxed it out of the cop. He refused to listen, looked down upon him and he got his just deserts. What do you expect when a criminal fails to halt and obey an officer of the peace. Obviously his knee's are just fine so the cop knew what he was doing when he halted Fernandez. Next time he should not run/walk from police when told to stop. He would also be wise to listen to the cop who tell's him about the law. Breaking it after that is ubsurd.

He also seem's to think he deserves better treatment then other's. That is just plain wrong, and I'm quite happy he was sent to jail for a bit.

Again bravo Louis VI the gravitationally priviledged.

---

It's quite difficult to know whether this is meant to be wry, but let me take it on face value and then you can chuckle at yet another upper class twit. :wink3:

In the country that Professor Fernandez-Armesto comes from, criminals are convicted of a crime in a court of law, not by random policemen. Since the judge dimissed the case, I think we can be safely assured that in your country, like his own, the professor is also considered innocent.

We have had endless threads about gun-control and how it is the cherished right of American citizens to defend themselves against over-enthusiastic government power. I recall a recent one where the police were excoriated for kicking in a door and shooting a person with no notice and no identification of who they were. But when a person simply requests a policeman to demonstrate his identity, he is villified.

It appears that many of you would consider my manner and accent a deliberate slight and desire to look down on people. (I am visiting Paris later this month and it appears that I shall have to watch out for the cockades and guillotine once again :stunned: ).

Yet I have always been treated with unfailing kindness and respect when visiting the United States. I have transgressed minor laws by accident as the professor did, and in both instances, the policemen - one in urban Pittsburgh and one in deepest Iowa - were helpful, sympathethic and courteous. At no time did they offer me physical violence for the crime of wielding a plummy accent in public. Indeed, in Iowa I was invited to dine with the good sheriff's family and friends.

I suspect some are actually ashamed of what has happened to a visitor to their usually wonderful country, and are trying to cover it up by blaming it on class. If Felipe was less of a gentleman, having been found innocent, he would be suing for a great deal of money, and you know it.

A comment from the BBC News article:

Quote:

---

I was in Honolulu recently and a cop called to me "Hey you, no jaywalkin' in future". I said OK and hurried off. I asked my hotel desk clerk what it was all about and he said that because of the anti-gay, repressive local authorities, walking in an effeminate manner had been outlawed. I spent the rest of my holiday walking like John Wayne and escaped police harassment. Now I know the truth! Bet the clerk had a right old hoot at my expense.

---