The Chattanooga Police Department has decided that an officer who assaults two people, including pushing one through a plate glass window, will not be criminally charge. Det. Kenneth Freeman is truly a free man after, on Christmas Eve, shoving 71-year-old Wal-Mart greeter Bill Walker to the ground. Why? Because he was asking for a receipt check. Freeman then reportedly shoved Gholom Ghassedi through a glass door when he tried to assist Walker. The police routinely charge people with battery and resisting arrest if they touch the sleeve of an officer. Even hugging an officer or passing gas near an officer has led to a charge of assault. Yet, the Chattanooga Police Department can’t imagine what it would charge Freeman with after assaulting an elderly man and shoving a good samaritan through a glass door.
Collegedale Judge Kevin Wilson reviewed the complaint filed by Walker and decided that there was no room for an assault charge.
Walker said an alarm went off when Det. Freeman and another city police officer, Edwin McPherson, were leaving the store. He tried to stop Freeman and pushed against a soft drink machine and to the floor. He said the officer then stood over him in a threatening manner as he lay on the floor.
A customer, Gholom Ghassedi, then told Freeman, “You can’t push down an old man” and began struggling with him only to be shoved through a glass door. He was bleeding from his neck when officers arrived.
Cpl. Larry Robbins Jr. of the Collegedale Police said he decided not to bring assault charges against Det. Freeman because the incident was a misdemeanor not committed in the presence of an officer — not counting the officer doing the beating of course. He further insisted that, since Gholom Ghassedi, did not seek medical attention, it did not meet that criteria. Finally, he explained “there were no other crimes committed along with the possible simple assault.”
If that seems a bit ridiculous, it is. There is a host of possible charges here in the abuse of an elderly person and assault on not one but two individuals. The police department had to struggle to find a way not to charge Freeman, insisting that they were “unable to determine at the scene that there was any intent to commit an assault.” Well, whatever his intent, he succeeded in knocking an elderly man to the ground and throwing another through a door. Was that all involuntary muscular reflex?
By the way, Freeman was involved in a scuffle with attorney Lloyd Levitt at the Courts Building in May 2007. What is clear is that the problem is not just Det. Freeman, but the Chattanooga Police Department itself.
For the full story, click here.
It is nearly impossible for most police officers to recognize criminality in their own ranks. The mindset simply forbids it.
Consider the BART police who stood by, perhaps in shock like all the other witnesses, and did absolutely nothing in response to witnessing a fellow uniformed officer murder a detained, unarmed citizen by shooting him at point blank range as the citizen lay prone on the ground with his hands pinned behind his back by another officer. I’m sure they were surprised. But what is important to understand from the incident is that none of the dozen or so other police present at the time recognized what Officer Mehserle did as being a crime. He wears the same uniform as them. Attends the same roll call.
The unique cultural mindset of comradeship among law enforcement officers in most agencies simply precludes any consideration, no matter how glaring the evidence, of another officer’s criminality. It’s considered wrong to even think that way.
“In the case of the greeter, he has an express statutory right as an agent of the shop owner to detain a suspected shoptlifter if he does so with probable cause and in a reasonable manner. Otherwise it is battery in the context of this case.”
Otherwise?
Neat trick.
But “the context of this case” includes the fact that, mistakenly or not, the theft security alarm sounded as detective Freeman was attempting to exit the store. A lot less than that has passed for probable cause in false arrest complaints against police officers. Detective Walker’s associate, Sgt. McPherson, responded by stopping and displaying his receipt for inspection. And there is nothing in the police reports or any of the statements to indicate that Mr. Walker’s attempts to detain Detective Freeman were anything other than reasonable.
It’s also quite neat how you managed to totally ignore the relevant issue: was detective Freeman reasonable to fear for his personal safety under the circumstances, thus justifying his reaction?
You’ll find few who would agree that he is, outside the ranks of Tennessee law enforcement.
Let the local prosecutor charge Mr. Walker with battery if he thinks it is justified (RME). But the fact remains that Detective Freeman should have been arrested at the scene. And unless the prosecutor determined from the evidence that he was reasonable to fear for his safety, Detective Freeman should have been charged and arraigned.
ROTCODDAM:
“Physically touching or blocking a person to get their attention has not been viewed by any court of jurisdiction as a form of assault.”
*********
I suppose you mean “battery” here rather than “assault,” but where did you get the idea that intentionally “touching or blocking a person to get their attention” isn’t battery. Battery is an offensive or injurious touching without legal justification to do so. Surgeons may be sued for battery if they simply exceed the scope of the patient’s consent, so your statement that intentionally touching someone without permission or legal justification isn’t battery just doesn’t hold water. In the case of the greeter, he has an express statutory right as an agent of the shop owner to detain a suspected shoptlifter if he does so with probable cause and in a reasonable manner. Otherwise it is battery in the context of this case. For example if the greeter simply picked someone out of a crowd and grabbed them to shake then down as a shoplifter, that is battery.
Also your reversing the situation isn’t much help either since if the officer is doing the arrest it’s no longer a “citizen’s arrest.” Instead, the officer has express statutory policing authority to detain and arrest for certain offenses committed in his presence or pursuant to a warrant of arrest. If the suspect resists, he is resisting a prima facie lawful act by the officer which is itself a crime in most jurisdictions.
About the only thing I am getting out of your comment worthwhile is to avoid selling cookies to the detective. I’ll take that sound advice.
john:
“Cops are filthy power hungry pigs. No more no less. Expect little from their kind.”
*************
I’ll hold you to that mantra the next time you hear the tinkling of breaking glass in your downstairs at night and the rustling of footsteps up toward your bedroom door. Maybe someone who was paid attention to in school will rush to your house armed to defend you. Put them on your speed dial. If I was a cop in your town, you’d need to.
john,
Your statement is unfounded nonsense.
Cops are filthy power hungry pigs. No more no less. Expect little from their kind.
Cops are simply mad that they never paid attention in school and are stuck in their back-water hick-town.
It’s worth considering the relevant state law on citizen’s arrest in this case. Given the circumstances, Mr. Walker was probably within his rights and the law to attempt to physically restrain a shoplifting suspect (regardless of store policy). The police officer’s reaction is in no way mitigated by any attempt on the part of Mr. Walker to effect such an arrest. And the police officer’s reaction can rightly be viewed in precisely the same light were the roles reversed. Had the police officer attempted to detain Mr. Walker as a shoplifting suspect and been assaulted in this manner, Mr. Walker would be awaiting trial.
Physically touching or blocking a person to get their attention has not been viewed by any court of jurisdiction as a form of assault. (Plenty of big city mayors have tried it with pan handlers.) Otherwise, police officers would face assault prosecutions on a daily basis. But reacting to such touching with a violent assault has almost always been regarded as a crime. Normally the only circumstance to mitigate such a determination would be evidence to support a claim by Detective Freeman that his personal safety was endangered by the touching. But that determination should not be made by the responding police officers investigating the incident. They take statements and collect evidence. Following an arrest, a prosecutor would determine from the statements, evidence, and any follow up interviews if Detective Freeman had reasonable cause to fear for his personal safety when a seventy one year old store employee touched him.
Whatever you do, don’t try to sell any Girl Scout cookies to Detective Freeman this year.
According to the report the greeter told police that he had a tag in his pocket and when he turned to tell Freeman to stop he was the one who set off the alarm. The greeter stated that he forgot that the tag was in his pocket.
“Rule number 1: NEVER GRAB a POLICE OFFICER; their training is to instantly react to being grabbed, their life may depend on a fast reaction.
The police officer had every right to react to being grabbed.”
They are also trained to handle any situation by de-escalation. Trying to resolve it peacefully. So in your opinion if a cop feels a tug on his sleeve he has every right to kick the hell out of that person. WOW, I feel sorry for the first lost kid that was trained to find a police and gets this guy, he is going to get F#&ked up. I just hope someone is around to get video of it so you got something to spank the monkey to…
I take it all back. I’m an idiot, and I was drunk. I apologize.
The brutal thugs of the police departments need to be put back in their cages.
I do not shop much, although I have had the alarm system trigger on me several times. Once, and the most embarrassing, the alarm occurred while I was in uniform. Of course, just like getplaning and other decent, honest shoppers, I always submit to whatever the merchant wants, which most times is, “oh, you are okay, go ahead”.
USA, Mesmerize-
I can’t tell you how many times the door alarm has gone off as I leave Target, Walmart, Sam’s, you-name-it. When the door checker asks to see my reciept, I always cheerfully show it to them. I am helping them do their jobs, and that’s my job as a customer. Anyone who resists or refuses is acting like a criminal, don’t you agree?
Hey Mike Spindell,
My aged mind is likely not more that 1/2 a step behind yours at best; however, it is more likely 2 steps ahead of yours in ‘mind going’ agedness.
One thing an officer of the law is supposed to be able to do is SHOW GOOD JUDGEMENT. Recognizing the difference between a threatening situation and a normal one is a vital skill for a person who is licensed to use deadly force; it’s part of regular training. This officer clearly showed an inability to distinguish between the two types of situations–which is a serious hazard not only to the public, but to the officer himself. He can create dangerous situations where none existed before.
The Chattanooga Police Department, in giving no accountability for this extremely poor behavior on the part of its officer, has demonstrated nothing less than corruption and really, really stupid policy. Recall the recent shooting in Oakland–this is simply an example of the same kind of thing. Should the man have been shot because he reached toward the officer, would that have been justified? What if the greeter had had a heart attack or some other physical trauma as a result of the assault? Should the officer have been exonerated for manslaughter if the glass his other victim went through had sliced the carotid artery? The three (officer and victims) of them were lucky that this didn’t turn out worse.
As Tom Baker said above, there is absolutely no excuse for what the officer did, and there is absolutely none for the Chattanooga Police Department’s response to the situation. Both the department and the officer have been irresponsible in the extreme.
There are several posters here who I hope get the privilege of being beaten or tasered (or having a loved one beaten or tasered) for looking at a cop the wrong way.
There is NO EXCUSE for what that officer did. None.
A badge is not a license to be a belligerent asshole.
You jackbooters defending him should find a nice police state to live in. For the time being, this isn’t one.
Republicans have spent 30 years building a police state. Now cops are running amok. It’s going to take a long time to undo the damage the GOP hath wrought.
What would have happened if the person who assaulted these two Walmart employees had not been a cop? Obviously they would be arrested. So, the fact that this guy was a cop changes things? Why? How?
Aside from the legal issues, this guy is a bully. He should certainly not be a cop.
Jamesel Smith:
Correct on the law as you are, you have made the basic error of assuming that these trolls can read and comprehend simple English. After 8 years of Bush et idiots, we should probably know better.