PDA

View Full Version : Independent Police Monitor, Denver Chief Disagree: Smashing Handcuffed Woman's Face Into Walls




HOLLYWOOD
03-14-2014, 02:15 PM
Here's a goody the cameras caught blatant excessive use of force... check the video out, catches most of the abuse. NOTE: When the elevator doors opens, notice the pool of blood on the elevator floor. Denver Police chief, "actions justified" :rolleyes:

VIDEO: http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/03/13/independent-police-monitor-chief-disagree-on-force-case/


DENVER (CBS4) – Denver’s independent monitor, who oversees Denver law enforcement and safety agencies, says the Denver Police Department and Manager of Safety made the wrong call in not disciplining a female officer for her use of force on an intoxicated woman in a 2012 case that is just now coming to light.

A CBS4 investigation obtained surveillance videotapes, photos and interviews from the case which stemmed from a police call at the Renaissance West End Flats located at 1490 Zenobia Street on Dec. 28, 2012. Police say they received a 911 hang up call from apartment 315.
http://cbsdenver.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/maass-lucero-package1-pkg.jpg?w=518&h=291 (http://cbsdenver.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/maass-lucero-package1-pkg.jpg)

When two officers arrived to follow up on the 911 call, officers said they heard loud arguing emanating from the apartment. The occupants, identified as Patricia Lucero and Nickie Penaflor, had both been drinking and fighting.
Officers found Penaflor had an outstanding warrant so they arrested him. Lucero, however, was not wanted and was not arrested for a crime. But one of the two officers, Marika Putnam, decided to take Lucero to detox due to her inebriation and aggressiveness.
“That was a judgment call and a good call based on how aggressive the lady was,” said Police Chief Robert White. “Apparently the officer felt she (Lucero) was a harm to herself or others and that’s why they took her to detox.”
Lucero admitted having six beers that evening.
http://cbsdenver.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/maass-lucero-package-pkg.jpg?w=518&h=291 (http://cbsdenver.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/maass-lucero-package-pkg.jpg)
An image of Patricia Lucero being escorted out of the apartment building (credit; CBS)

But after being handcuffed, surveillance videotape from interior cameras at the apartment complex, reviewed and aired by CBS4, show Lucero twice crashing into walls headfirst while handcuffed and under the control of Officer Putnam. In written reports, police blame Lucero for causing herself to crash into walls. In one police account, summarizing Putnam’s actions, it says, “This redirecting action (by Putnam) caused Lucero to stumble forward and strike her head on the elevator alcove wall.”

In a statement, Putnam said that in the first crash into a wall, “I spun her around to move her to a safer position.” On the second time that Lucero ran into a wall, the officer said, “I believe that she stumbled due to her high intoxication level.” Asked if she had intentionally run Lucero into a wall, Putnam responded, “No.”
By the time Lucero reached the lobby of her apartment building she was bleeding profusely from a head wound. She was hospitalized and received stitches.
“She had no reason to hit me that hard,” Lucero later told a police sergeant in a videotaped interview. “We were walking to the elevator and she banged my head against the wall.”
Lucero complained she was a victim of excessive force. But a Denver police internal review of the incident exonerated Officer Putnam of unnecessary force. Chief White signed off on that recommendation.

“When I look at the totality, I think the officer’s actions were reasonable given the circumstances they were confronted with,” White said. “I think we came to the right decision. I don’t think the officer was excessive or malicious in her actions in dealing with the lady.
“As a result of her (Putnam’s) attempt to gain control, one time she (Lucero) hit her head on the wall and the other time hit her head against the elevator. I am convinced both those bumps were the result of the officer’s attempt to gain control, not intentional acts on the officer’s part.”
However, in a report released Thursday, Denver’s independent monitor, Nick Mitchell, took the opposite view, writing that Lucero was a victim of excessive force.

“One of the officers twice maneuvered the woman head-first towards walls in a manner that risked serious injury,” wrote Mitchell. “When taking individuals into protective custody, officers have an affirmative obligation to ‘make every reasonable effort to protect the detainee’s health and safety.’
“The Office of the Independent Monitor recommended that the officer be disciplined for using inappropriate force and failing to protect a detainee who was handcuffed and otherwise vulnerable, but the Manager of Safety’s Office did not accept our recommendation.”

Origanalist
03-14-2014, 09:30 PM
" I'm pretty convinced that, uh, both of those bumps to the head was a result of the officer to 'gain control' and not any intentional act on the officers part".

Wow, that's some "redirecting" job officer.

VoluntaryAmerican
03-14-2014, 09:45 PM
Looks like we got some head bumpin' to do.

Occam's Banana
03-14-2014, 09:57 PM
" I'm pretty convinced that, uh, both of those bumps to the head was a result of the officer to 'gain control' and not any intentional act on the officers part".

Wow, that's some "redirecting" job officer.

Chief White: "Oooh, wassa matter - 'oo got a widdle boo-boo?"

aGameOfThrones
03-14-2014, 10:25 PM
But one of the two officers, Marika Putnam, decided to take Lucero to detox due to her inebriation and aggressiveness.

Can't even be drunk in your appartment.



“That was a judgment call and a good call based on how aggressive the lady was,” said Police Chief Robert White. “Apparently the officer felt she (Lucero) was a harm to herself or others and that’s why they took her to detox.”

This is call something...


When I look at the totality, I think the officer’s actions were reasonable given the circumstances they were confronted with,” White said. “I think we came to the right decision. I don’t think the officer was excessive or malicious in her actions in dealing with the lady.

95% good, riiiiiight. When you look at the video there is no fucking way that clearly doughnut eating miss piggy did not purposely and maliciously not caused those injuries.

Spikender
03-14-2014, 10:48 PM
Naw, this all makes sense.

Just like criminal scum shooting themselves in the back when they're handcuffed in police cars, sometimes criminals choose to wildly bash their face into the wall while they're handcuffed in apartments.

Weston White
03-14-2014, 11:25 PM
It seems there are two issues being folded as one, (1) a very drunk and aggressive person, (2) who poses a danger to herself or others.

However, she was drunk on her own private property, while the drunk tank is really for passed-out drunk individuals with no place else to readily go and not for thrashing about fools), in the latter instance a ‘5150’ welfare hold to the nearest mental health facility would have been the more appropriate action to take. Unless she actually did pose a serious threat, the officers should have just let her be, at least for a short time to see if she was able to manage cooling herself off during that time, and if not then revisit the matter.

Brian4Liberty
03-15-2014, 12:00 AM
Officers found Penaflor had an outstanding warrant so they arrested him. Lucero, however, was not wanted and was not arrested for a crime. But one of the two officers, Marika Putnam, decided to take Lucero to detox due to her inebriation and aggressiveness.
“That was a judgment call and a good call based on how aggressive the lady was,” said Police Chief Robert White. “Apparently the officer felt she (Lucero) was a harm to herself or others and that’s why they took her to detox.”

The woman was sitting on the ground with her arms folded over her knees. She was not "a harm" to anyone. The arrest should be the first and biggest error by the cop.

The first time she was swung into the wall is questionable, but not blatantly abusive. The second swing next to the elevator was the "punitive", intentional hit. And had it been a flat wall, there probably would not be any visible injury to the woman. The fact that she hit the pointed corner of the wall caused the damage.

Brian4Liberty
03-15-2014, 12:01 AM
It seems there are two issues being folded as one, (1) a very drunk and aggressive person, (2) who poses a danger to herself or others.

However, she was drunk on her own private property, while the drunk tank is really for passed-out drunk individuals with no place else to readily go and not for thrashing about fools), in the latter instance a ‘5150’ welfare hold to the nearest mental health facility would have been the more appropriate action to take. Unless she actually did pose a serious threat, the officers should have just let her be, at least for a short time to see if she was able to manage cooling herself off during that time, and if not then revisit the matter.

Did you watch the video? What was she doing before they grabbed her?

Origanalist
03-15-2014, 08:18 AM
She was a danger to others.

http://attrition.org/movies/image/theothers.gif

HOLLYWOOD
03-15-2014, 10:19 AM
I forward the vid to a cop and deputy sheriff I know... both place the fault on the female officer and her procedures. One of the comments I remember was: "Hah, that's the old 'Tilt-A-Whirl' (amusement park ride) having fun with cuffed drunks. Without any other video or information, going on what is shown, that female officer handled the situation completely wrong."
It seems there are two issues being folded as one, (1) a very drunk and aggressive person, (2) who poses a danger to herself or others.

However, she was drunk on her own private property, while the drunk tank is really for passed-out drunk individuals with no place else to readily go and not for thrashing about fools), in the latter instance a ‘5150’ welfare hold to the nearest mental health facility would have been the more appropriate action to take. Unless she actually did pose a serious threat, the officers should have just let her be, at least for a short time to see if she was able to manage cooling herself off during that time, and if not then revisit the matter.

Schifference
03-15-2014, 10:42 AM
She needed to be taken into custody to keep her safe from herself.