Reply #34: 31% is not what I would call "Quite Frequently"

[TheEuclideanOne]

In cases like this, where the cop was caught on video tape, I think that the person had the possibility of bringing charges against the officer. This video tape looked pretty damning in my eyes and still no conviction. It makes me wonder what it would take to really convict a police officer of assault. But like yourself, I don't really know the full details of the case or the assault laws in New York, so I can't pass judgement with any certainty. Also, from what I read in the article, it seemed like the lawyers somehow turned it onto the drug history of the cyclist. So, maybe it was a case of the Police Officer's lawyer being better than the cyclist's lawyer. Nonetheless, simply on the merits of the video tape it sure looks damning.


If this video tape didn't exist, the cyclist would have no realistic way to bring this officer to court on assault charges. Do you agree? That would mean that the 31% is still a portion of the cases where the police officer can even be challenged. So, if you add all of the cases where the police officer never goes in front of a judge because his word would automatically have higher credibility than a non-police officer, I would argue that "31% being categorized as quite frequently" has even less merit.