See other National News Articles
Title: (Dallas) Police Deny Excessive Force In Bloody Arrest (black cop, white girl)
Source:
NBC5i.com
URL Source: http://www.nbc5i.com/news/6158812/detail.html
Published: Jan 16, 2006
Author: NBC5
Post Date: 2006-01-16 20:18:09 by BTP Holdings
Keywords: Excessive, (Dallas), Police
Views: 13967
Comments: 855
POSTED: 5:16 pm CST January 16, 2006
DALLAS -- E-mails and pictures circulating the Internet tell the tale of a Dallas woman's bloody run-in with police after a roller-skating outing escalated into an arrest with excessive force, but officers and some witnesses Monday told a different story.
The incident happened early Saturday morning in Deep Ellum after police attempted to speak with Michelle Metzinger, 25, who, according to a police report, was intoxicated and weaving through traffic on roller skates.
Images: The Arrest & Other Slideshows
The pictures that stemmed from the events that followed are dramatic. They show an officer arresting Metzinger. Her face is covered in blood and there is a puddle of blood on the sidewalk.
"Very excessive. Uncalled for, you know. We're talking about a 250-pound guy and a 100-pound girl. It was just over the top," witness "D.C." said. "All I saw were her feet in the air and disappearing behind a cop car."
However, Dallas police and other witnesses tell a totally different story.
They said Metzinger was drunk and that she not only ignored officers who asked her to stop skating in the street, but also shouted profanities.
According to reports, an officer then tried to arrest Metzinger for public intoxication.
She resisted and attacked the officer, Lt. Rick Watson said.
"The officer attempted to turn her around, at which time the suspect then reached up and grabbed the officer's -- right part of his face -- trying to gouge the officer's eye," Watson said.
Despite the interest that the story has generated online and in the media, Metzinger said she would not comment on the incident until she had consulted with a lawyer.
Metzinger also had not filed a complaint report, so Dallas police were not conducting an internal investigation.
When I worked concert security and someone got bloodied, it was always proper for us to "get our stories straight." Or, as Eddie Murphy said in that movie, "You were lying your asses off." That LT is a lying piece of shit and so is the black cop who LIED in his report.
I'll tell you one thing for certain, this bastard needs to be caught and given a damn hard ball-batting. And then a WHITE magic marker taken to his forehead and the words BAD COP inscribed thereon. What was done was brutal, inexcusable and unjustified.
Police Deny Excessive Force In Bloody Arrest
Dramatic Pictures, Rumors Circulate Online
UPDATED: 6:11 pm CST January 16, 2006
Poster Comment:
Pictures taken by a witness clearly show the cops are LIARS!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-399) not displayed.
.
.
.
#400. To: Red Jones (#399)
While I do apprecaite your reactionary approach to the matter. I did not say that she cut herself while shaving. I said that the cut on her face was small. A cut the size of an M&M on your face would produce more than enough blood than was displayed in the picture. That said, once again, we don't know whose blood that is in the photo. BOTH parties were bleeding at the scene and had to be treated. That could be Officer Gordon's blood in that picture. There is no way to determine whose it is from that picture.
Calling someone a Yahoo does not mean that I do not care about them. It speaks solely to my opinion of their frame of mind. I am beginning to doubt if you actually served on the force based upon many of your statements. However, I will not challenge your statement and will take you at your word for now, which is FAR more than any of you have done for me. You stated earlier that eyewitness testimony was the worst kind, but you are more than willing to accept ANY eyewitness testimony other than mine. The outraged eyewitness in the photo next to the policeman is the friend who was skating in the street with her, but stopped when told to. She was also drunk. I can understand that she would be upset if her friend was bleeding. I have never said that I do not care about the defendant or her rights. In this situation, she did not have the right to resist arrest nor the right to assault the police officer. Being as how she did both of those things, I think her only receiving a small cut on her face shows tremendous restraint and use of passive detainment on the part of the officer. She was not beaten, she was not maced, she was not tazered - she was simply taken to the ground and cuffed. As for your feeble wish for this to be excessive force when it clearly was not, note how she STILL has not filed a complaint...
I agree although I'd describe the scratch as a laceration based on the amount of blood on the pavement. I don't see blood on the cop in the photos nor do I see his head and face on the ground. Not that it's a big deal, just a bit confusing for me, but I wondered if you are aware that you're using the Quote box (which is meant to italicize the words of the poster you're replying to) rather than the Comments/Response box?
Christine, I just was using the first text box that appeared. I will use the comments box from here forward, thanks. :) The reason you don't see blood on the police officer is because people did not care to take photos of the police officer at the scene and probably did not care if he was bleeding.
that IS her blood. that's more concrete evidence than an eyewitness account which in many cases has been proven to be inaccurate and unreliable due to biases, imperceptions, and loss of memory as time passes. how many times have you yourself forgotten details of a life's event?
That's plausible.
Good deal Richard. You can assume I was on the job, and I’ll assume you were actually on the scene. About that witness - her friend, as you claim - you stated she was drunk. How do you know and why wasn’t she also arrested for obstructing and public intox? That would be the normal course of these events, from my experience.
This is but one of many studies that have been done on eyewitness
unreliability. U.S.
Navy Study: Eyewitnesses Unreliable Abram Katz , New Haven Register --
Science Editor 06/21/2004 Victims who get a good long look at violent
criminals are unlikely to identify them accurately later, Yale and U.S. Navy
researchers have found. This caveat follows from a unique study of 509
Navy and Marine officers undergoing elite survival training at Fort Bragg,
N.C. Results suggest that police and juries may give eyewitness testimony
too much credibility, said Dr. Charles A. Morgan III, a Yale psychiatrist and
lead author of the study. "Memory in healthy people is not inherently
terribly accurate. There's a substantial amount of error," Morgan said. "Maybe
we should demand more evidence." Authors wrote, "The present data have a
number of implications for law enforcement personnel, mental health
professionals, physicians, attorneys and judges." Mario T. Gaboury,
director of the Crime Victim Study Center at the University of New Haven,
said, "Eyewitness testimony is often inaccurate. I don't think anyone
understood the magnitude of the problem until the past few years."
Previous research has called the reliability of eyewitness accounts into
question. The current study, which was published in the International
Journal of Law and Psychiatry, is unusual in that participants were
educationally, physically and mentally similar and all underwent nearly
identical stressful events, Morgan said. Groups of top officers undergoing
realistic training at Fort Bragg are placed in a mock prisoner of war camp and
subjected to low- and high-stress interrogations by U.S. officers acting as
the "enemy." The 40-minute high-stress session includes the threat of
physical violence and creates stress levels equal to landing on an aircraft
carrier at night for the first time and actual combat. Details of the
training are classified, but the study implies that participants are also "man-
handled." Twenty-four hours after the grueling sessions, the officers
were asked to identify "interrogators" and "guards." They viewed a lineup, a
group of photos and a sequence of photos. Morgan and colleagues found that
in the live lineup 30 percent of the high- stress group made correct
identifications versus 62 percent of the low-stress group. Using
sequential photos the high-stress accuracy rate was 49 percent, while the low-
stress rate rose to 76 percent. The photo-spread method, which is used
by most police departments, yielded even more lopsided results. About 32
percent of the identifications in the high-stress group were correct, while 68
percent were wrong. Around 88 percent of the low-stress group picks were
correct, with a 12 percent error rate. This means that almost seven out of
10 high-stress officers made mistaken identifications. Furthermore, there
was no relationship between the confidence level and accuracy of the memory,
Morgan said. Officers who were absolutely positive that they had selected
the right person were no more likely to be correct than officers who expressed
some doubt. "Unfortunately, that's what people on juries listen to,"
Morgan said. Morgan said high levels of stress hormones such as cortisol
and adrenaline may degrade spatial memory. Norepinephrine, also produced
under stress, apparently interferes with the brain's prefrontal cortex, where
memories are integrated, Morgan said. Morgan said he hopes to measure
hormone levels in trainees under various degrees of stress. John H. Mace,
professor of psychology at the University of New Haven, said many studies have
cast doubt on the accuracy of eyewitness memories. Mace said the Yale
study is important because it apparently corroborates many previous hypotheses
and results. It may be a long time before defense lawyers start to
challenge eyewitness testimony on the basis of the Yale and other memory
studies, Gaboury said. Court rulings typically lag behind scientific
consensus, he said. "We must be cautious. We don't want the pendulum to
swing too far," Gaboury said.
Police to investigate incident involving Deep Ellum skater DALLAS - Dallas police will conduct an internal affairs investigation into a scuffle and the arrest of a woman on roller skates in Deep Ellum. Michelle Metzinger, 25, was arrested Saturday evening by officer Ceaphus Gordon after she was skating in and out of traffic, Lt. Rick Watson said. Gordon told Metzinger to get out of the street, and Metzinger complied before visiting a nearby business, Watson said. The officer followed her in an attempt to identify her, and she became verbally abusive, Watson said. Gordon asked Metzinger to come outside by his patrol car and, once she was there, told her she could not skate in traffic. When Metzinger became verbally abusive a second time, the officer asked her how much she had to drink, and she responded she had had two or three drinks, Watson said. Gordon told Metzinger she was under arrest for public intoxication and to turn around and put her hands behind her back. As Gordon moved around Metzinger she reached up and grabbed the right side of the officer's face "to gouge his eye out," Watson said. "Out of self-defense he took her down," Watson said. "She was scratching him and kicking him with her roller blades." Gordon managed to wrestle Metzinger into handcuffs but not before sustaining lacerations and bruises to his face. Metzinger, who had lacerations on her face, refused treatment on the scene but was taken to an area hospital before being booked into the Lew Sterrett Justice Center on charges of public intoxication and assault on a public servant, Watson said. Police may investigate woman's arrest, scuffle Dallas police may investigate an arrest early Saturday in Deep Ellum that resulted in a scuffle between an officer and an Old East Dallas woman. Michelle Metzinger, 25, was being cited for public intoxication in the 2800 block of Elm Street, where she had been seen roller-skating in traffic. According to a police report, she clawed at the face of Officer Ceaphus Gordon, who then used a defensive maneuver that caused both of them to fall to the pavement. Officer Gordon was treated for scratches and bruises on his chin. Ms. Metzinger refused treatment at the scene but was taken to Parkland Memorial Hospital, where she received stitches. Ms. Metzinger, who could not be reached for comment, also was charged with assault on a peace officer. She was released Sunday morning on $1,500 bail. Photographs of the incident circulated over the weekend, some showing Ms. Metzinger with a bloody face, Officer Gordon pinning her to the ground. Cpl. Donna Hernandez, a Dallas police spokeswoman, said she couldn't comment on the officer's actions. She said an internal investigation could be sparked by a complaint from Ms. Metzinger or a request by the officer's supervisor. "Now seeing how this turned out," she said, "it very well may be looked into regardless." Marissa Alanis So, Richard, you claim as an eyewitness you observed at the scene, paramedics wiped the blood away from Ms. Metzinger and you could see she only had "a very small cut". Yet the police state Ms. Metzinger refused treatment at the scene and at the hospital her very small cut required stitches. How is it that your eyewitness report and that of the police differ? Where was Ms. Metzinger positioned when paramedics wiped her face and where were you standing (and how far away) that you could see paramedics wipe Ms. Metzinger's cut and close enough to see it "was a very small cut"?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Gag me with a spoon. This cop was way wrong. If a kid can't have a damn drink and roller skate down the block in America, lets all get chipped and dipped today. This would never have happened 15 years ago.
I recall one time about 26 years ago when I was at a meeting in a park district building and while I was leaving to go to my truck there was a bunch of kids horsing around. One of them (maybe 10 years old) ran into the gate of the chain link fence and cut himself below the left eyebrow but above the eyelid. There was a good amount of blood and it was a deep laceration. I took him back inside the building to the washroom and had him wash his face. We dried him off with paper towels and used a couple of them to stop the bleeding. Then one of the other kids brought the first aid kit I always kept in the truck and we put a couple of gauze pads on the cut. At this point and the gauze pads were just used as a compress to keep the bleeding from starting again. He was not covered in blood quite like Michelle in these photos and there certainly was not enough bleeding to cause there to be the amount of blood we see in this incident. In other words, the blood did not run all over his face. It was on his hands but not an awfully enormous amount. The attendant at the front desk managed to contact a relative who knew where the parents were and I drove the kid up to the hospital where his folks met us a few minutes later. The cut only required 5 or 6 stitches. As an aside, I got a cut on my face once from a work related injury. It needed 4 stitches to close and it did not bleed a whole hell of a lot either. I've had cuts on my fingers that bled more than the one on my face.
The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism -- ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power. Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Good find, christine. You beat me to it :)
A follow up question regarding your eyewitness testimoney, if you would please. Regarding that very small cut you saw on Ms. Metzinger's face, on which side of her face was that cut?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
well, like I said to Richard, the photographs that we DO see are far more
telling of what occurred than his "eyewitness" and possibly biased account.
that and the fact that this officer has had several prior excessive force
complaints.
Jethro, I do not know if she was or was not cited for obstruction and public intoxication. I did not pay attention to how her situation played out that night. I saw her drinking alcohol that evening, but I did not administer any test as to whether or not she was drunk, I based my assessment on her behavior and movement. Perhaps you should look into what happened to her...
Richard, another question on your eyewitness testimony if you would please. Police to investigate officer's scuffle with skater From Staff Reports Dallas police have launched an internal investigation into the arrest of a roller derby player who scuffled with an officer trying to cite her for public intoxication and skating in traffic last weekend in Deep Ellum. The investigation will determine whether Officer Ceaphus Gordon, 39, a 13-year department veteran, acted improperly when he fought with Michelle Metzinger, 25, a member of Assassination City, a roller derby team. About 12:45 a.m. Saturday, Ms. Metzinger was skating in traffic in the 2800 block of Elm Street when the officer tried to write her a ticket and arrest her on a charge of public intoxication, according to a police report. The officer stated in his report that she was belligerent and that when he tried to arrest her, she tried to gouge his eye. While trying to control her, the officer lost his balance and both fell to the ground, the report states. Dallas police Chief David Kunkle said the department is taking witnesses' allegations of excessive force seriously. "We just thought it was good to start the investigation now while the memories of the witnesses are fresh and they'll be easy to find," Kunkle said. Police records show since 1994 there have been at least six allegations against Officer Gordon of excessive force, physical abuse or assault. Gordon has been disciplined twice for escalating or participating in a disturbance, and once for conduct discrediting the department. Some of the probes into allegations pointed at the officer were inconclusive, and he has received some commendations for good work. Meanwhile, Metzinger and her attorney said they may also file a complaint against Officer Gordon. WFAA-TV reporter Rebecca Lopez contributed to this report. So Richard, your eyewitness testimony is that Officer Gordon "simply took her to the ground and handcuffed her" but the police report states he lost his balance and both fell to the ground. How do you explain this difference in your eyewitness testimony and the police report?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
But in your #401 you state categorically she was drunk. Which of your statements is true?
Sounds like he's trying to find a way to explain being 'over zealous'.. if his actions were on the up and up.. why try to doctor the report in this way?
Christine, ANY complaint that is filed against an officer, regardless of whether it is frivolous or not, has to be logged in his file. That he has only received SIX frivolous complaints (note, NOT convictions or disciplines) in 15 YEARS speaks more to his ability to use good judgement in situations than anything else. All you see in the photos is a suspect being restrained. You don't know why or what happened prior to the photos. You can't tell if she pulled a knife, a gun, or a bazooka before she was taken to the ground and handcuffed. Christine, I know the photos make GREAT emotional fodder, but you are just looking at pictures, you were NOT there, and I was. I saw what happened. This is not a big deal, she resisted arrest, assaulted a police officer, and got a small cut as a result.
excellent find. one witness: "the officer planted his knee in the side of her head."
Jethro, She was categorically drunk according to my definition of the term. She had slurred speech, had trouble standing, was overly loud in public, was drinking a lot, ... those are the methods I use. So, according to MY opinion, yes, she was categorically drunk. I never claimed to be an expert on the subject, I am going off my personal experiences. Besides, Jethro, being as how this will never go to trial, what does it matter?
Starwind, You know very little it is clear. The statement that she "refused treatment at the scene" means that she declined to have the paramedics stitch her up, not that her injuries were not tended to. It does not take a very big cut on the face to receive stitches, and I can understand why she would not want to be treated at the scene for a facial cut. You are trying to make something out of nothing, Star, you are grasping at straws. She was indeed treated at the scene, triaged, and taken to the hospital for the stitches. Not a big deal.
Christine, As for your statements about eyewitness testimony. Why are you so willing to believe the eyewitness testimony that you WANT to believe if you know that ALL eyewitness testimony is fundamentally flawed? See, you can't have it both ways... sorry.
Christine, There is NO way to determine WHOSE blood that is in the picture. None at all. You would have to do testing on the blood to determine to whom it belonged. Also, Christine, remember that you have thrown out ALL eye-witness testimony as being fundamentally flawed, so you can't go back to it when it suits your points.
Jethro, How old are you?
BTP, Wow, you are a racist and an idiot (not surprising, the two often go hand in hand)... it is good to see that you know as little about the human anatomy as you do about proper race relations. The face bleeds far more easily and more profusely than the hands do if you put cuts of equal size on them. Perhaps you should try it on your own face and hands as a test right now? I mean, in the interest of science, of course.
Jethro, No video plays when you click on your link.
Christine, Remember: YOU were the one who pointed out that ALL eyewitness testimony is fundamentally flawed. So I guess we can throw out your "excellent find." Sorry.
56 and you?
the photos we DO see are consistent with all other reports i've read other than yours and that of Lt Watson. it's michelle's head on the ground with the officer atop her. it's his knee i see planted on her back and it's her blood i see gushing from her face. i see no blood on him and it says in a report above that he was treated only for scratches and bruises to his chin. you say Starwind is grasping at straws? you're the one grasping at straws. you really have no more stake in this than a mere eyewitness? doubtful.
Inadmissible. Next!
36
Christine, AGAIN: YOU already threw out ALL eyewitness testimony as fundamentally flawed. You can't go back to it when it suits your cause after you have dismissed it. Christine, I came here to tell you what I SAW. From the very beginning, I have been vilified by this body of people. Not one person here gave me the benefit of the doubt and wanted to listen to my story, instead I have been called everything from a flat out liar to a paid shill for the federal government sent here to "spin" the story. I have nothing at stake here other than to defend myself from all these attacks on me and tell the truth about what I saw that night. I am not the judge, jury or excecutioner. I am just an eyewitness to the situation. I was there and I saw what I saw. For saying so I have been crucified.
ROFLMAO! Jethro, you made me laugh. Sorry, but my testimony is not inadmissable because I am not an expert on determining the state of intoxication of an individual. I never claimed to be an expert, so you can't strike it from the record. I am an eye-witness, the jury can draw whatever conclusions they like from my statements. But who are we kidding... this will never go to trial.
Thank you. Will you also kindly answer where she was relative to the scene when she was "triaged" by paramedics that you saw her, and please answer on which side of her face was that "very small cut" that you saw?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Richard you seem to also have overlooked these questions in my post #416: How do you explain this difference in your eyewitness testimony and the police report? (The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I'm not as sure about that as I was. The video that you unfortunately can't see shows me a vulnerable officer. I'd take it to trial if she were my daughter. I don't see a jury believing the cop, not to mention your testimony (g).
Starwind, There is little difference between "took her to the ground" and "he lost his balanace and they both fell to the ground" from an observational standpoint. She was on rollerskates so I would presume that when she was resisting arrest and assaulting the police officer, he went to grapple her, but because she was unable to keep her footing due to her rollerskates, they both fell to the ground. Sorry, but from my point of view, I was not looking to evaluate whether or not he should be awarded points for a proper wrestling takedown. He subdued his assailant, which is his job, and did so without causing serious bodily injury to the suspect. He did a great job, even moreso if he took her safely to the ground as a result of losing his balance due to her skates. So, to answer your question: there is little difference between the two accounts other than perspective.
Jethro, She is 25, so if she was your daughter, you would not have a say in whether or not it went to trial, sorry. Trust me, she will plead this out before Valentine's Day...
And are you going to answer? Will you also kindly answer where she was relative to the scene when she was "triaged" by paramedics that you saw her, and please answer on which side of her face was that "very small cut" that you saw?
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
Comments (441 - 855) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestRed,
#401. To: Jethro Tull (#398)
Jethro,
#402. To: Richard (#397)
That she got a scratch on her face does not indicate in any way that Michelle was innocent or that inappropriate force was used, Christine.
#403. To: christine (#402)
#404. To: Richard (#401)
#405. To: Richard (#403)
The reason you don't see blood on the police officer is because people did not care to take photos of the police officer at the scene and probably did not care if he was bleeding.
#406. To: Richard (#401)
#407. To: Richard (#403)
#408. To: Richard, Jethro Tull, Tom007, christine (#397)
Thirdly, I saw her face when the paramedics wiped the blood that she had smeared all over her face with her hand, it was a very small cut.
Posted on Wed, Jan. 18, 2006
By MELISSA SANCHEZ
STAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITER 05:56 AM CST on Tuesday, January 17, 2006
#409. To: Starwind, Richard (#408)
"Out of self-defense he took her down," Watson said. "She was scratching him and kicking him with her roller blades."
#410. To: christine, Jethro Tull (#402)
I agree although I'd describe the scratch as a laceration based on the amount of blood on the pavement. I don't see blood on the cop in the photos nor do I see his head and face on the ground.
#411. To: christine (#407)
#412. To: Richard (#408)
#413. To: BTP Holdings (#410)
#414. To: Jethro Tull (#406)
#415. To: Has this video been posted yet? (#410)
#416. To: Richard (#396)
He did not beat her, he did not mace her, he did not use his baton, he did not taze her. He simply took her to the ground and handcuffed her.
11:00 AM CST on Wednesday, January 18, 2006
#417. To: Richard (#414)
I saw her drinking alcohol that evening, but I did not administer any test as to whether or not she was drunk,
#418. To: Starwind (#416)
While trying to control her, the officer lost his balance and both fell to the ground, the report states.
#419. To: christine (#413)
#420. To: view the video JT linked! (#415)
#421. To: Jethro Tull (#417)
#422. To: Starwind (#408)
#423. To: christine (#407)
#424. To: christine (#404)
that IS her blood
#425. To: Jethro Tull (#409)
#426. To: BTP Holdings (#410)
#427. To: Jethro Tull (#415)
#428. To: christine (#420)
excellent find. one witness: "the officer planted his knee in the side of her head."
#429. To: Richard (#425)
#430. To: Richard (#424)
#431. To: Richard (#421)
She was categorically drunk according to my definition of the term.
#432. To: Jethro Tull (#429)
#433. To: christine (#430)
the photos we DO see are consistent with all other reports i've read other than yours and that of Lt Watson.
#434. To: Jethro Tull (#431)
Inadmissible. Next!
#435. To: Richard (#422)
The statement that she "refused treatment at the scene" means that she declined to have the paramedics stitch her up, not that her injuries were not tended to.
It does not take a very big cut on the face to receive stitches, and I can understand why she would not want to be treated at the scene for a facial cut.
#436. To: Richard (#416)
So Richard, your eyewitness testimony is that Officer Gordon "simply took her to the ground and handcuffed her" but the police report states he "lost his balance and both fell to the ground".
#437. To: Richard (#434)
But who are we kidding... this will never go to trial.
#438. To: Starwind (#436)
#439. To: Jethro Tull (#437)
#440. To: Richard (#438)
.
.
.