Cops arrest jogging woman....

[oohrah]

Sure, letter of the law ... blah, blah, blah. If this happened in my city, I would be all over my councilman to reprimand the priggish police supervisor who set up the "jaywalk task force" in the first place.

[Armybrat]

To mimic what the chief said, I can't believe what passes as controversy on Texas Chl forum .

You don't see this is controversial? While she may have been in the wrong and jaywalked, it is very over the top to physically subdue a person and arrest on this charge.

THIS is a central point of objection.

It appears the LEOs escalated the incident unnecessarily and overreacted to a panicky girl.

4 "beefy" cops to subdue a coed?

No wonder Dallas rejected Acevedo's application.(not to mention his stupid comments on social media)

[steveincowtown]

....because she couldn’t hear them

This happened in Austin. Not sure who is at fault here. I want to say the woman might be for having her music up too loud and not being able to hear in her immediate surroundings. Or maybe she heard them (APD) and chose to ignore.

Some may call it unreasonable, I call it good police work.

Do you know how many people have been caught for MURDER after being stopped for jaywalking?

http://www.10news.com/news/man-wanted-f ... emon-grove" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A 22-year-old man wanted in Louisiana on murder chargers was arrested in Lemon Grove after he was caught jaywalking, authorities announced Saturday.

Do it for the children.

/sarcasm

[cb1000rider]

You don't see this is controversial? While she may have been in the wrong and jaywalked, it is very over the top to physically subdue a person and arrest on this charge.

The supreme court has already established that minor offenses are arrestable. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atwater_v._Lago_Vista" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

IMHO, I think it's a bad enforcement choice. Lucky it was caught on video. If they had to physically subdue someone, that's a much more substantial issue.

[Charles L. Cotton]

This is the kind of out of control law enforcement that we should not tolerate in our society.

Defending this police action makes you a hypocrite in your defense of the 2ed amendment. There are other liberties we have lost too.

I'm not happy about the tactic either, but if she really refused to identify herself so the officer could issue a citation, then the officer had two choices; 1) let her walk away; or 2) make a custodial arrest and take her to the station for identification. I can't fault him for making a custodial arrest if she truly wouldn't identify herself when asked. She apparently chose jail over a citation.

Chas.

[Texsquatch]

But she did do something wrong. Maybe the arrest was harsh, but maybe she'll also re-think the ear buds considering she was snatched from behind by two huge guys. Maybe she's lucky they were cops. There's plenty of other guys that could grab her in Austin - and she wouldn't get a chance to scream.

[jimlongley]

Sure, letter of the law ... blah, blah, blah. If this happened in my city, I would be all over my councilman to reprimand the priggish police supervisor who set up the "jaywalk task force" in the first place.

And in my city I have requested that my politicians enforce the law on jaywalkers and bicyclers who violate the law. i would encourage such a task force. These people violate traffic laws that are there for their safety as well as the drivers' and they get all upset and righteous when they get ticketed. Sorry, I have come too close to hitting jaywalking joggers who ignore signals and crosswalks, and almost wrecked my car avoiding one just recently, who could not be seen from the approach and who just ran right out into the street, and the gave ME a dirty look and gesture when I swerved.

Maybe the cops did over react, and maybe not. Supposedly she was "grabbed from behind" but we don't really know what the grab was, it may have just been a tap on the arm to get her attention, and nowhere do I see four burly cops manhandling her, until the end when she struggled to resist being placed in the patrol car, when one of the four had to crawl across the seat to pull her in.

[texanjoker]

To mimic what the chief said, I can't believe what passes as controversy on Texas Chl forum .

You don't see this is controversial? While she may have been in the wrong and jaywalked, it is very over the top to physically subdue a person and arrest on this charge.

Controversial and over the top how? They are taking an enforcement action for a violation where many are hit and killed all the time for jaywalking. She didn't stop when lawfully ordered to do so by a uniformed peace officer. Did she not hear them or just ignore them? Who knows. Do you just call kings x and let her go when she doesn't stop or grab a hold of her arm to effect a lawful detention? As a reminder, force can be used to effect an arrest or detention, as long as reasonable and necessary. Since verbal commands didn't work, grabbing her arm while ID one self would be the next step. At one point she even told the uniformed LEO she didn't care who the beep he was showing she knew he was a leo. She also dropped to the ground on her own. She then refused to ID after being lawfully detained for a citable offense. They did not charge her with resisting as some stated in this thread so I have to ask. What do you expect the leo's to do when a person refuses to ID for a citation? Just let them go or arrest them for the appropriate charge of failure to ID? Or should the leo's just let anybody run away and not do their jobs? Now I would not get into a vehicle pursuit, ect over this charge, but grabbing her arm? That is a lot different.

The best part of this incident is the chief's rant. That was epic.

[cb1000rider]

I'm not happy about the tactic either, but if she really refused to identify herself so the officer could issue a citation, then the officer had two choices; 1) let her walk away; or 2) make a custodial arrest and take her to the station for identification. I can't fault him for making a custodial arrest if she truly wouldn't identify herself when asked. She apparently chose jail over a citation.

Chas.

Yea, if she refused to provide her identity, that's a bad play and one that she's totally responsible for.
APD has had focus on jaywalking before, especially when Austin has a high incidents of vehicle vs pedestrian accidents... If you can't hear the LEOs, then you probably can't hear the cars either.
There has to be a better way though.

[Cedar Park Dad]

But she did do something wrong. Maybe the arrest was harsh, but maybe she'll also re-think the ear buds considering she was snatched from behind by two huge guys. Maybe she's lucky they were cops. There's plenty of other guys that could grab her in Austin - and she wouldn't get a chance to scream.

Inversely, maybe the cops are lucky she wasn't carrying and opened up on her attacker(s).

Four cops, sitting around giving jaywalking tickets? Talk about misplaced priorities.

Lets be clear here. Wearing ear buds is not a crime. If so, generally everyone under 30 would be guilty.

[mamabearCali]

If she really did refuse to identify and they did not just cart a screaming terrified girl off before she could calm down enough to tell them her name....well that was stupid on her. But it looked like she was terrified, not just petulant, and her being terrified is directly related to how she was detained. Perhaps (we will never know) she might have been more cooperative if she did not feel like she had just been attacked.


What I object to most is how they handled the initial contact. If a person cannot hear you and you grab them from behind, you are going to scare the living crap out of them and escalate the sitatuion. The person rightly thinks they are under attack and their reflexes and fight or flight kicks in, setting everyone up for a bad situation. Maybe the LEO's here are ok with grabbing people, but I am sure not being ok being grabbed. There are many reasons a person would not hear a LEO, ambient noise, hearing disability, and yes being silly and having your earbuds turned up too far. I have a bad ear from no fault of my own. You come up on that side of me and talk with any ambient noise and I might not hear you at all. They need a different way other than grabbing a person. Wave a hand in front of their face. Tap them on the shoulder. Tap them on the arm.

[Cedar Park Dad]

If she really did refuse to identify and they did not just cart a screaming terrified girl off before she could calm down enough to tell them her name....well that was stupid on her. But it looked like she was terrified, not just petulant, and her being terrified is directly related to how she was detained. Perhaps (we will never know) she might have been more cooperative if she did not feel like she had just been attacked.


What I object to most is how they handled the initial contact. If a person cannot hear you and you grab them from behind, you are going to scare the living crap out of them and escalate the sitatuion. The person rightly thinks they are under attack and their reflexes and fight or flight kicks in, setting everyone up for a bad situation. Maybe the LEO's here are ok with grabbing people, but I am sure not being ok being grabbed. There are many reasons a person would not hear a LEO, ambient noise, hearing disability, and yes being silly and having your earbuds turned up too far. I have a bad ear from no fault of my own. You come up on that side of me and talk with any ambient noise and I might not hear you at all. They need a different way other than grabbing a person. Wave a hand in front of their face. Tap them on the shoulder. Tap them on the arm.

Agreed on all counts.
To be clear once coherent, she should give her ID or be arrested.
But also to be clear, the police chief is allocating resources extremely poorly. I'm sure East Austin could use those assets.

[Keith B]

To mimic what the chief said, I can't believe what passes as controversy on Texas Chl forum .

You don't see this is controversial? While she may have been in the wrong and jaywalked, it is very over the top to physically subdue a person and arrest on this charge.

Controversial and over the top how? They are taking an enforcement action for a violation where many are hit and killed all the time for jaywalking. She didn't stop when lawfully ordered to do so by a uniformed peace officer. Did she not hear them or just ignore them? Who knows. Do you just call kings x and let her go when she doesn't stop or grab a hold of her arm to effect a lawful detention? As a reminder, force can be used to effect an arrest or detention, as long as reasonable and necessary. Since verbal commands didn't work, grabbing her arm while ID one self would be the next step. At one point she even told the uniformed LEO she didn't care who the beep he was showing she knew he was a leo. She also dropped to the ground on her own. She then refused to ID after being lawfully detained for a citable offense. They did not charge her with resisting as some stated in this thread so I have to ask. What do you expect the leo's to do when a person refuses to ID for a citation? Just let them go or arrest them for the appropriate charge of failure to ID? Or should the leo's just let anybody run away and not do their jobs? Now I would not get into a vehicle pursuit, ect over this charge, but grabbing her arm? That is a lot different.

The best part of this incident is the chief's rant. That was epic.

While I don't disagree that arresting someone for failing to ID (verbal or otherwise) when asked is appropriate, we have only seen the video from the point she is already on the ground. Everything before that is eyewitness statements, police officers statements and Acevedo's press conference theatrics, which IMO are over the top as well.

Initially it still goes back to situational awareness and how fast she was able to identify the officer. Like the eyewitness stated, he didn't feel the officer was in her line of vision. Even if he was up beside her if she had her gaze to the opposite side, he may have not been in per peripheral vision. I have a sister-in-law that has no peripheral vision on her left side and unless you are well in front of 90 degrees up she will not know you are there.

Now, once she knew it was a police officer and was being uncooperative and refused to ID, then it changes and the arrest was justified. Before that is 'controversial' and is still open depending on who's account you feel is accurate.

[android]

I ride my bike along public bike paths. I often pass joggers with ear buds in. It is always my practice to hail them, especially if I'm passing them from behind so that they won't suddenly swerve into my path during my pass. Almost none of them appear to hear my hail. If I've figured this out, the jaywalk enforcing officers should be able to do the same thing.The assumption was that the woman was failing to voluntarily comply. My assumption is that she didn't have that opportunity to do so. They reacted by grabbing her when it would have been just about as easy to wave a hand in front of her eyes to get her attention rather than grabbing her. Someone who is unexpectedly grabbed is very likely to have a startled reaction and attempt to pull away.

I admit that it is a questionable practice to wear earbuds in public places. It is plain stupid (in my view) from a situational awareness point of view. But wearing earbuds in not yet criminal and turning a failure to hear into a failure to comply is an unnecessary escalation of the matter.

Perhaps I'm over-reacting? I sponsored a thread here in the past year which discussed my hearing loss and my concern that I may be in a position not to comply as crisply as an LEO might demand. The specific situation that I cited as my worst possible environment with cars and trucks passing as might occur during a traffic stop. I have a problem processing what I strain to hear under those kinds of conditions and there is sometimes a delay in my response.

It is one thing to need to take control of a situation. It is another to give the subject a reasonable opportunity to respond. "Reasonable" is not a synonym for "instantaneous"

I cycle and never wear ear buds, but almost everyone under 30 exercises with some kind of ipod or whatever. I've know that, and cops should be able to figure that out too. I know they don't take people that score too high on the test, but it doesn't take a genius IQ to know people with earbuds can't hear you.

She reacted exactly how I would expect a 20ish woman unexpectedly grabbed from behind by persons unknown to react.

APD has had focus on jaywalking before, especially when Austin has a high incidents of vehicle vs pedestrian accidents... If you can't hear the LEOs, then you probably can't hear the cars either.
There has to be a better way though.

Yes, because drunks getting run over on S. Congress at 3am has everything to do with alert UT students jogging mid afternoon near campus.
It's not about safety, In the 24 years I've lived in Austin, I think I've heard of 1 UT student getting hit by a bus and he wasn't even hurt.

[n5wd]

This is what happens when you hire a Californian to run your police department.

What in the world does that have to do with this incident?