I really think there needs to be an investigation into the training for this kind of situation.

Sure, she was a big girl, but you are telling me that three police officers couldn't control her? Maybe before shooting her with the beanbag, Humphreys could have lent a hand.

Now, I wasn't there, but this is what it looks like to me. If the Chasse case weren't enough to take him of the beat, this incident most definitely shows that his default may be excessive force.

It appears that there were four police officers there, not just three. The girl had just barely begun to resist, and already Humphreys was aiming his weapon.

All this over a Tri-Met exclusion. He needs a desk job.

Leinad

Not as easy as you might think. I worked for a time at a juvenile detention facility. I saw several instances where it took more than two staffers to wrestle under control the most petite little girls you have seen. I can only imagine what it would have taken to control a girl of that size.

mp,

Apparently a beanbag, point blank to the leg.

The point I am getting at, and Jack alluded to this, is that Humphrey's was ready to fire that beanbag no matter what. This cannot be SOP for the Portland Police. Especially for cases involving 12 year old girls who shouldn't be riding the MAX.

The 3rd office didn't' appear until 0:23 seconds into the video at which time the other officer had the 5'7 160# subject on the ground.

And what this video most clearly show is the punch she threw. (0:06)

Pretty simple to me, the next time you're on MAX and some gang fight breaks out, just tap the button to let the operator know and he/she will take care of it. Oops that button doesn't work we've learned this week.

Next I guess you can call 911 and specifically tell them to send the most milk toast cop they have, because you don't want anyone to get hurt.

As for me, I'll call 911 and ask for the head busting, take no prisoners, Clint Eastwood look alike and please tell him/her to hurry.

I'm just grateful that there isn't any real crime in Portland, and our Police can spend their time arresting 12 year old girls riding the MAX.

is that Humphrey's was ready to fire that beanbag no matter what.

At what point did he point the LTL at the perp? Before or after she resisted and assaulted the other officer?

I really don't think saying, "She's a 12-year-old but she's a big 12-year-old" is going to be a winning strategy if this goes to court.
Every time the jury hears "12-year-old" they're going to get more and more pissed off.

After, but she is a twelve year old girl. Our cops should know how to subdue an unarmed suspect without the use of a weapon. Portland, does not need a Victoria Snelgrove incident on their hands:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/10/21/college_student_dies_after_being_shot_by_bean_bag_bullet_near_fenway_last_night/

As I state above, I think this was a waste of time for our police. But I don't have a lot of sympathy for this girl. You really shouldn't punch police officers, even if you're right and they're wrong. Because it isn't going to end well.

Jack, I've seen you use, "all over a TriMet exclusion", a couple of times. It's not over a TriMet exclusion, its over Assaulting a Public Safety officer. If someone flees police in a stolen car, but the reason the officer noticed them in the first place is they did not signal a turn, is the chase, "all over a missed turn signal"?

Too many glory toys for cops...if you gave them neutron bombs, they'd use them. Welcome to Paramilitaryland, Oregon -- "The City Where the Constitution Used to Work."

You gotta nip this in the bud, [R]Andy. Nip it!

I see Humphries try to go "hands-on", but his gun falls off his back. I challenge any of you to find a 170 pound girl and try to wrestle her down inside your concrete garage without either of you getting hurt. The beanbag shot happened as she was punching his partner in the face repeatedly. As soon as she was hit, she stopped and was taken into custody with no further problems.

JP - your analogy is nonsense.

What I see in the video is a police officer forcefully push the back of the girls head down, followed then by the girls defensive reaction. Followed by Humphreys ballistic reaction.

More nonsense than claiming that she was beanbagged because of a TriMet exclusion? My analogy is closer to reality than his. Stick to bartending.

followed then by the girls defensive reaction

LOL!!! That's the best rationalization and justification of battery on a police officer I have read yet.

And what this video most clearly show is the punch she threw. (0:06)

What, you mean when she raises her arm in defense after the officer grabs her by the back of the head and shoves it down below her shoulders (0:05)? You keep claiming that's a punch. Maybe it was, but how can you tell for sure? You can't see her actually hit the officer's face. What the hell was he doing grabbing her by the back of the neck instead of her other arm, which seems to have been down by her side until he pushed her head down?

Humphreys doesn't even really try to help his fellow officer get her under control. He just decides to shoot her a couple of seconds later. Which doesn't actually get her under control, considering that she's still struggling on the ground when Humphreys shoots her again ten seconds later.

Brad's right about the gun practically falling off his shoulder. He keeps reaching back to adjust it. If you've got an officer who can't perform his usual functions and is no use for much of anything but shooting people with a bean bag, so naturally that's going to be his first option.

At what point did he point the LTL at the perp? Before or after she resisted and assaulted the other officer?

He had it unslung, off his shoulder, and ready to shoot someone before she was even off the train.

If someone flees police in a stolen car, but the reason the officer noticed them in the first place is they did not signal a turn, is the chase, "all over a missed turn signal"?

And the reason police departments all across the country have stopped hot pursuit in most cases is that the chance of civilians and officers getting hurt in car chases outweighs the need for cops to have car chases.

I challenge any of you to find a 170 pound girl and try to wrestle her down inside your concrete garage without either of you getting hurt.

"possibility of getting hurt" is not enough reason to whip out a shotgun and shoot someone at point blank range. and, it's also not enough cause for a police officer to do it, either.

And forget the excuse of it being a "non-lethal" weapon. Several people have died as a result of being hit by a "bean bag" gun.

I'm confused: why did the bean bag shooter not attempt to help his partner subdue the girl using his physical training, instead of almost immediately resorting to a gun at point blank range?

That's the best rationalization and justification of battery on a police officer I have read yet.

Yeah, good luck being the officer with the reputation for having been battered by a 12-year-old girl. Even a big 12-year-old girl.

Seriously, publicly I know other cops are going to defend Humphreys on the Chasse thing and this, and they may not like Sizer or Saltzman or Adams (hell, I don't like Adams) but privately you think they're going to look at this video and think the guy was in serious danger from that girl? No way in hell.

He had it unslung, off his shoulder, and ready to shoot someone before she was even off the train.

Funny, the video says otherwise. It is clearly on his shoulder at 0:09 sec as he is engaging the perp. It comes off at 0:11 sec as he is getting separation from the assailant and positioning himself to engage.

I'm confused: why did the bean bag shooter not attempt to help his partner subdue the girl using his physical training, instead of almost immediately resorting to a gun at point blank range?

Because he would have had to set the gun aside to help his colleague out, which would have meant someone else could pick it up. He couldn't physically help with the gun attached because it would have been too easy for her to grab and she could have used it as a club if nothing else. As I mentioned above, he was useless except as someone to fire a gun.

Several people have died as a result of being hit by a "bean bag" gun.

Which is why they changed targeting protocols and she was hit in the thigh.

At 6 seconds in, and half a second before the "punch," is one officer trying to put a head lock on the girl? His arm moves behind her head without her seeing it and he forces her head forward and down more than a foot BEFORE she responds to THIS action. Imagine he had gotten his lock on before the takedown and snapped her neck. And if he did not plan on doing his takedown why go for a head lock at all? . . . . Then, because she responded, it was seemingly all OK to take what looks like a knockout punch at the girl at 11 seconds in.

@Leinad

He shouldn't have shot the girl, but no office with a shoulder-fired weapon (aka rifle, shotgun, bean-bag thrower, whatever) is in a position to wrestle anyone. Even slinged over the shoulder, an officer cannot lose control of the weapon trying to subdue another person. The officer arresting the girl is pretty much on his own until a 3rd officer can show up.

Funny, the video says otherwise.

What are you, blind? It's in his right hand, off his shoulder by 0:04 in the new video. He restraps it by 0:07 when he joins in the fray briefly before he pulls it off again and shoots.

I'm not sure why the split-screen video has the closer camera's version "lightened". You can very clearly see Humphreys is carrying the shotgun with the stock in his hand at 1:12 in the older version. You can also see that with he can go from shotgun on the shoulder to shot fired in less than a second.

At 0:05 sec while his partner is attempting to handcuff the perp, he is already placing the LTL back on his shoulder, prior to her assaulting the officer.

As a side note, a web sling on what I assume is a polyester blend jacket is a match made in hell. Every time he swings his shoulders, that LTL will want to slide off his shoulder. Thats why that type of sling is never used by tactical teams.

This video starts with the first physical contact seen. Time 02, the officer takes girl’s left arm with his left hand as she swings around the people. At 05 he pulls arm up behind her back. Time frame 06 lets go of her right arm and she turns to face the camera. Time 07 shows the officers right arm come from up behind her head and she is pulled around in front of him at time 08, her left hand comes forward because she is pushed down. Time 09 has her right arm come up as she is spun into him and is seen on his left shoulder. By now Officer Shotgun has slammed into her from behind and her left arm is seen up by the first officer’s right shoulder. Time frame 10 has the first officer pushing her away from him with his left arm under her right armpit as Officer Shotgun shoots? See the shell casing appear time frame 12 bottom right corner. The first officer delivers a right hand punch above her shoulders then spins her around and slams her on her back at time frame 15. The shotgun is now pointing at her head about 6-8 inches away. Her legs and arms are moving and she scoots forward on the ground. Time 17 has Mr. Shotgun circling behind the officer and coming up to her feet. Time frame 18 has a third officer come in from the street behind the action. At time frame 19 there is a flash of light. It is first seen on the side of the first officers and the girl’s right leg. It is then a focused spot on the ground next to her left foot. Frame 21 shows both her hands free and the first officer rising up. Continuing frames show both officers grabbing her hands and pulling her to her feet then twisting her arms behind her. Time 26 has the officers pushing her down and forward to the ground (Time 29). One officer kneels on her lower right midsection and his other knee is on her neck. The other officer has his right knee on her left thigh and buttock. Time 34 has a forth officer on scene. Officers are now trying to figure out how to use handcuffs. Frame 40 Officer Shotgun offers his cuffs, then kicks at object on floor (bottom left) that #4 picks up. Time 52 she rolled on her right side. Left hip patted. Time 56 pulled to feet. She is moved next to other subject. Time 1:02 #4 picks up first object from frame 12. Girl is lowered to floor Time 1:04.

At 0:05 sec while his partner is attempting to handcuff the perp, he is already placing the LTL back on his shoulder, prior to her assaulting the officer.

Thank you for acknowledging that he'd taken it off his shoulder, grabbed it by the stock, and lifted the muzzle toward the girl. Apparently, you have discovered that her name is "Perp". You never do mention why he shoots her again, after she's on the ground, even though another officer has appeared on the scene by then.

OK, I've changed my mind. It's not the officers I fault. It's Rosie Sizer and whoever bought these bean bag shotguns that have emasculated the readiness strength of the police force.

The bean bag shotgun turns an otherwise useful police officer into somoene who's utterly useless for performing police functions. They cannot do anything but shoot their wad. As this incident shows, in a situation where two officers are needed, the second officer is completely restricted to the function of bean bagging the suspect. Two men with their hands free, trained in how to take down suspects at the police academy, should be able to hold even a large twelve-year-old girl in place until backup arrived in ten seconds. But as we can see, the single officer who is able to close with the suspect is in mortal danger from the girl, and the only aid the shotgun-carrying officer can provide — even after the girl is on the ground with an officer on top of her — is to circle the action and shoot her again. Obviously, the first shot wasn't enough to subdue the suspect so the bean bag shotgun appears to be completely useless, and an officer who can do nothing but shoot the bean bag shotgun is similarly useless. Because the bean bags aren't supposed to be fired from close range, and the guy carrying the shotgun can't just drop it to join in physical arrest, a two-officer team where one officer is armed with the bean bag shotgun is left with only one officer who can close with the suspect and effect an arrest. Not exactly an efficient use of city funds.

• On the other hand, consider what might have happened if two bean bag shotgun-free officers trained in hand-to-hand-combat with grade-schoolers might have been able to do.
• They might have both been able to close and subdue the girl (although given the actors, hopefully without beating her to death).
• They might have been able to effect two separate arrests (since the bean bag shotgun was effectively useless and one officer did all the work in the arrest, presumably two officers could do twice as much work).
• The city might not be looking at some sort of lawsuit(s):


1. From the family of the girl for any number of reasons;


2. From Officer Humphreys and the police union for unwarranted suspension (you know that's coming).

He couldn't physically help with the gun attached because it would have been too easy for her to grab and she could have used it as a club if nothing else.

Except that he physically helps *twice*, before the other officer takes her down, and when the other officer is trying to put her arm back (he grabs her arm and bends it back, for cuffing). I'd call that "physically helping", Darrel.

The officer arresting the girl is pretty much on his own until a 3rd officer can show up.

There was not only a 3rd, but a 4th and 5th officer a few seconds away. The beanbag shooter saw them and knew they were there (the 3rd enters the frame seconds later to help arrest the girl).

The time between the girl starting to struggle to escape and a third officer starts helping: 11 seconds. The larger video (not shown) shows that other officers were *right there*, ready to help.

The time between when the girls starts struggling to escape and the officer raising his shotgun: 3 seconds.

It's clear she's unarmed; It's clear she's not going to escape; it's clear the officer attempting to subdue her is not getting hurt; it's clear the officer is much stronger than her and has her on teh ground, on her back; it's clera she's not kicking him.

What *is* clear is that that it took him longer than a few seconds to subdue her--and so the other officer fired the beanbag shotgun.

I heard today that there was an adult male taken into custody immediately before the 12-yr old, and without incident. Apparently HE didnt resist. Smart guy.

Several people have died as a result of being hit by a "bean bag" gun.

Actually, since the bag redesign, nobody has been killed by one.

I'm not going to say the officer did the right thing, nor that he did the wrong thing - I'm not in a position to know.

The old style square "pillows" did kill - if the perpetrator was hit in the eye or directly in the area of the heart - the present "sock" design has incurred no mortality to date.

Actually, he didn't grab the stock, his hand was over the ejector port. The gun was never aimed toward the girl but tilted back to allow him to place the gun back on his shoulder AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, the gun was upside down at that instant.

eco, Humphries tries a couple of times to join in the action but he doesn't do anything other than reach out a couple of times. I don't know if that's because he realizes he's too close to shoot or because the gun's slipping off his shoulder or what. In either case, he's more or less useless while he can't even keep the gun on his shoulder. And yeah, the comment about the other officer being on his own was another bit of sarcasm.

mp97303, when I took my gun safety classes many years ago, we referred to the stock of a long gun as the portion of the gun chassis that surrounded the mechanism and the barrel. It sure looks to me like he's grabbed it by the top of the stock; he swings it the same way he does later when he shoots the girl, which would be consistent with a gun where the strap loops are mounted on top. But that's just my interpretation.

Actually, since the bag redesign, nobody has been killed by one.

Nope. And a few minutes with Google would've shown you that. I found five.

eco, Humphries tries a couple of times to join in the action but he doesn't do anything other than reach out a couple of times.

still not accurate. the second time, he grabs her arm and twists it behind her, handing it to the other officer. all while holding the shotgun in the other hand. apparently, he wasn't too worried that she'd use that free hand to grab the gun.

but the real problem here isn't this parsing of details--it's that police forces in America become more paramilitary by the year. police forces are not military units; 12 year old girls are not terrorists. every single aspect of this event illustrates how grossly disproportionate American law enforcement has become--and further and further removed from civil society. Police are not "a breed apart" or "warriors"--they are a part of society, not set above it.

I heard today that there was an adult male taken into custody immediately before the 12-yr old, and without incident. Apparently HE didnt resist. Smart guy.

Irrelevant, of course.

it's that police forces in America become more paramilitary by the year.

Isn't that a direct result of the escalation of violence by the criminals?

Isn't that a direct result of the escalation of violence by the criminals?

Is it?

Let's look at the case at hand for a moment. What "escalation" by the unarmed 12-year-old required a shotgun response?

Really, I'm mainly saying this: a police force that rolls up armed to the teeth and shoots a 12-year-old within ten seconds for resisting arrest is going to get a predictable response from citizens: hostility, defensiveness, anger, and almost certainly a feeling of being oppressed by a group that does all it can to act *separate* from society, not a part of it.

At some point, police need to take courageous steps to be *part* of civil society, not a paramilitary force. But more and more, police are organizing and treating themselves as a "breed apart"--in other words, something special, above, "different" than the "ordinary" citizen.

Remember Kroeker's efforts to do this in Portland? He aggressively pursued a policy of specific haircuts and clean-shaven men, and explicitly pursued the "breed apart" mentality, encouraging police officers to consider themselves special and, essentially, separate from society.

Here's one (very) brief discussion of some effects of paramilitary-ness:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4203345.html

Maybe because of situations like this is why police are adding additional firepower.

I know that my odds of guessing the age of a 160 lbs, 5'7" person being 12 years old is not great, even with 15 seconds to size up the person. Then add up this arresting situation, my odds would even be less.

I find it fascinating the "expert" comments being made about the situation based on this video.

Maybe because of situations like this is why police are adding additional firepower.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with a society where you can easily obtain large caliber and automatic assault weapons.

But something tells me that you find extremely rare, dramatic situations like this enough justification for a paramilitary, separate culture?

I know that my odds of guessing the age of a 160 lbs, 5'7" person being 12 years old is not great, even with 15 seconds to size up the person. Then add up this arresting situation, my odds would even be less.

What does assessing the person's exact age have to do with the decision to use a beanbag shotgun? And--did you notice that articles explain that one ofthe officers even knew who the girl was?

It almost hurts me to agree with Eco on something... :-)... But I gotta say this. I'm guessing that if the officers knew her, on sight, and knew that she was exluded from Tri-Met, then they also KNEW she was 12.

Generally I fall pretty solidly into the camp of "Hey, if you f with the police, you get what's coming to you", but in this case the girl is 12. TWELVE. I don't care how big she is, her brain development and maturity level is TWELVE. Max.

When you have multiple officers on hand, and you're dealing with someone you know to be 12, and there is no weapon involved, you don't shoot her with anything. Good grief it blows my mind that we even have to debate that.

Eco and Larry help make my point. How do you know which or all three of responding officers knew the lady was 12?

Secondly, Eco, if I was an officer knowing the lady was 12, I might respond differently than thinking the lady might be 18 or 19. Guessing an age would be important to me if I was an officer. I think most officers would agree, and even the average citizen.

You are both third-string quarterbacking.

I can easily visualize my K-9 County Sheriff brother-in-law yelling out to his partner and his dog as they subdue a running hooded assailant;

"Stop Rex(the dog). I think that's Marko. I think his birthday is Nov 21st-HE'S only 12 now!"

(Other officer) "No his birthday was Oct 21st-damit, he just hit me!"

"You're wrong, I just reviewed his rap sheet. Are you hurt?"

(other officer) "I wonder if Rex knows?"

LW, I'm not making your point because I'm not saying they guessed her age.... They pulled her off the Max train because they knew she was excluded. If they're familiar enough with her to know her by sight, then they likely knew she was 12. Certainly they knew her to be a minor. And your scenario with Marko and Rex was asinine and not at all revelant.

I'll stand by my earlier statement - multiple officers, a perp who's know to be a minor, and no weapon. And they open up on her within 10 seconds? Really?

We're third string quarterbacking?? DUH. Of course we are. And it's entirely appropriate for citizens to do so in regards to their public servants.