The CLEANEST Arrest You'll Ever See

[blaze]

When did the cop accuse him of being drunk? When did the cop threaten to arrest him for being drunk? Public intoxication is an after the fact let me cover my ass charge. Remember the case of a Black man Chris Lollie in Minnesota? He was accused of loitering/trespassing and was tased and arrested for not showing ID. All charges were later dropped and he was awarded 100,000 dollars. The cops were found to have done nothing wrong. Like the guys in this video Lollie also recorded his encounter.


St. Paul will pay $100,000 to Chris Lollie, tased in skyway arrest

A still image from a skyway surveillance video released Wednesday, Sept. 10, 2014, by St. Paul police related to the controversial arrest of Chris Lollie. Lollie, 28, of St. Paul, recorded his encounter with police officers Jan. 31, 2014, and posted the cellphone video to YouTube on Aug. 26.






The city of St. Paul will pay $100,000 to settle a lawsuit by a man over a January 2014 incident in which he was arrested and shocked with a Taser in a downtown skyway area, according to city council documents filed Thursday.


Chris Lollie (Courtesy photo)
The confrontation unfolded after a security guard at the First National Bank Building told Chris Lollie he was sitting in a private area in the skyway and had to move. Lollie said the area wasn’t marked as such.



Police approached him and asked him who he was. Lollie said he didn’t have to tell them because he had done nothing wrong. In a cellphone video he recorded of the incident, he said he was being targeted because he was black.

Officers eventually stunned and arrested him. He was charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct and obstructing the legal process. All charges were eventually dropped. Sara Grewing, St. Paul’s city attorney at the time, later said Lollie had been sitting in a public area.

An internal St. Paul police review cleared the officers of wrongdoing. Lollie sued over the incident.

The settlement was disclosed as part of the St. Paul City Council’s agenda for next week’s meeting, which was released Thursday. It stipulates that the payment isn’t an admission of liability, and requires Lollie to give up further claims against the city and the officers involved.

Samuel Clark, the current city attorney, said St. Paul officials “were prepared to go to trial in this case. But ultimately there is always risk in litigation. The settlement was the fiscally responsible thing to do for taxpayers.”

Lollie declined to comment, and his lawyers didn’t immediately return a phone message.

• https://www.twincities.com/2016/02/...00000-to-chris-lollie-tased-in-skyway-arrest/

It seemed like he was willing to let the dude go if he just walked away, but some white people have trouble respecting the authority of a black person no matter what the situation is. He thought he could disrespect a cop, let alone a black man. If he do that to just ordinary me at the Starbucks, I'm putting the paws on him. Just think if that was a black dude amongst a group of white cops. Disobeying direct orders, loud-talking them in their face and calling them bitches!?! That shit would have been a faces of death tape for real. Search your feelings , you know it to be true.

 

[doug777]

It seemed like he was willing to let the dude go if he just walked away.

Why did he have to walk away? The cop said he was interfering but the fact that the cop couldn't tell him how he was interfering lets you know it was a BS accusation.

If he do that to just ordinary me at the Starbucks, I'm putting the paws on him.

Unlike the cops that would do that you would most likely be charged and arrested for beating someone up for calling you a bitch.

Just think if that was a black dude amongst a group of white cops. Disobeying direct orders, loud-talking them in their face and calling them bitches!?! That shit would have been a faces of death tape for real. Search your feelings , you know it to be true.

That's what happened in the Chris Lollie case, Lollie didn't call them names but even though by law he didn't have to show ID the 3 white cops looked at it as disrespect because he wouldn't show it to them. He was tased and arrested, the charges were later dropped and he was awarded 100,000 dollars.

 

[ronmch20]

That false courage juice will get you fucked up every time. You can bet he got smacked around a little on his way to the slam.

 

[blaze]

Why did he have to walk away? The cop said he was interfering but the fact that the cop couldn't tell him how he was interfering lets you know it was a BS accusation.Unlike the cops that would do that you would most likely be charged and arrested for beating someone up for calling you a bitch.That's what happened in the Chris Lollie case, Lollie didn't call them names but even though by law he didn't have to show ID the 3 white cops looked at it as disrespect because he wouldn't show it to them. He was tased and arrested, the charges were later dropped and he was awarded 100,000 dollars.

If Chris Lollie didn't get into it with a cop who repeated gave him instruction to move on and then verbally abuse an officer of the law while intoxicated, were talking apples and oranges here.

 

[grownazzblakman]

 

[doug777]

If Chris Lollie didn't get into it with a cop who repeated gave him instruction to move on and then verbally abuse an officer of the law while intoxicated, were talking apples and oranges here.

In both cases you have cops giving orders that they didn't have a legal right to do.

Gave him instruction to move on.

Once again, why did he have to move on? The cop said interfering but when asked how am I interfering the cop says you're worried about things that have nothing to do with you, in other words, I don't like you standing here recording so I'm pulling this excuse out of my ass.

He verbally abused an officer of the law while intoxicated.

He called the cop a bitch after the cop illegally put his hands on him. You have no idea if the guy was drinking or not. Some of the responses in this thread are a perfect example of why it's so hard to hold the police responsible for their actions because there's always somebody who want's to give cops the benefit of the doubt. The review board in the Lollie case said the cops did nothing wrong. They ignored the fact that all charges against Lollie were dropped, they ignored the fact that Lollie was sitting in a public area, and they ignored the fact that by law Lollie didn't have to show ID, all they cared about was the police told him to do something and he didn't do it.

 

[blaze]

In both cases you have cops giving orders that they didn't have a legal right to dnce again, why did he have to move on? The cop said interfering but when asked how am I interfering the cop says you're worried about things that have nothing to do with you, in other words, I don't like you standing here recording so I'm pulling this excuse out of my ass.He called the cop a bitch after the cop illegally put his hands on him. You have no idea if the guy was drinking or not. Some of the responses in this thread are a perfect example of why it's so hard to hold the police responsible for their actions because there's always somebody who want's to give cops the benefit of the doubt. The review board in the Lollie case said the cops did nothing wrong. They ignored the fact that all charges against Lollie were dropped, they ignored the fact that Lollie was sitting in a public area, and they ignored the fact that by law Lollie didn't have to show ID, all they cared about was the police told him to do something and he didn't do it.

First if you're going to tell me the glassy-eyed, 20-something white dude, holding on to a empty pringles single container, yelling at a cop in the middle of the night is not drunk as Cooter Brown; that sounds like you just trying to win an argument right there. Second, I think the main reason people get gaffled in the first place is when people debate the legality of what a cop is or is not allowed to ask you to do. The problem is that there is no judge in a robe out there at the moment, laws are different from state to state, and situations give the police the right and privilege to make requests of private citizens under the law. For instance if they tell you to move on because they are trying to keep an area clear, you need to move. They could be trying to preserve a safe situation or even keep themselves out of danger. Either way, every time a cop asks you to do something, do it and go home! When you don't, it never goes well. I mean you can settle it in the court after, but that shit don't take back getting roughed up. Either way though, the cases are still not the same.

 

[BigDaddyBuk]

Why did he have to walk away? The cop told him he was interfering, when he asked how am I interfering the cop said because you're worrying about things that have nothing to do with you, that's not interfering.

Doesn't matter what he thought was going to happen he's going to get a big settlement from the city. A cop can't legally tase and arrest you for calling him a bitch.

He was interfering, and his entire demeanor was that of someone who was ready to fight. Plus he was drunk. His brother admitted it.

That dude was disobeying the lawful orders of a police officer.

 

[doug777]

First if you're going to tell me the glassy-eyed, 20-something white dude, holding on to a empty pringles single container, yelling at a cop in the middle of the night is not drunk as Cooter Brown; that sounds like you just trying to win an argument right there.

I never said he wasn't drinking or drunk what I said was you have no idea if he was drinking and you don't, you're speculating.

Second, I think the main reason people get gaffled in the first place is when people debate the legality of what a cop is or is not allowed to ask you to do. The problem is that there is no judge in a robe out there at the moment, laws are different from state to state, and situations give the police the right and privilege to make requests of private citizens under the law.

You're right, laws vary from state to state but I guarantee there's no law in any state that says worrying about something that don't concern you is interfering.

For instance if they tell you to move on because they are trying to keep an area clear, you need to move. They could be trying to preserve a safe situation or even keep themselves out of danger.

Once again you're right but for some reason, the cop didn't say any of that. The cop said he had to leave because what was going on was none of his business.

Either way, every time a cop asks you to do something, do it and go home! When you don't, it never goes well.

Watch this video, full of people giving the cops what for. Just because the cops tell you to do something or you can't do something doesn't mean they're right.

 

[doug777]

He was interfering

The cop said he had to leave because what was going on was none of his business, do you really consider that interfering?

His entire demeanor was that of someone who was ready to fight.

Debatable.

Plus he was drunk. His brother admitted it.

Is there another video? He didn't say it in this one.

That dude was disobeying the lawful orders of a police officer.

Telling someone to leave an area because it's none of his business is not a lawful order.

 

[blaze]

I never said he wasn't drinking or drunk what I said was you have no idea if he was drinking and you don't, you're speculating.You're right, laws vary from state to state but I guarantee there's no law in any state that says worrying about something that don't concern you is interfering. Once again you're right but for some reason, the cop didn't say any of that. The cop said he had to leave because what was going on was none of his business.Watch this video, full of people giving the cops what for. Just because the cops tell you to do something or you can't do something doesn't mean they're right.

You have got to be kidding me with those videos!!!! They really only prove my point! First, if you just so happen to know of the specific statue that says that the cop is in the wrong, great. State it and maybe it will end the situation. Also most of those interactions were more civil than the video that we have in question. You have no idea whether there are anti-profanity laws in place in that state which limit how you are able to talk to the police. In some states the use of "fighting words" toward police can get you gaffled. Finally, not for nothing, but I took the time to watch both of those videos. There were only 2 instances where black people were involved: One where the dude got the cop to pick up the cigarette butt and the one where the college student was going ape shit. I tell you this with all sincerity: If a black person walks up to a white cop in a situation with lights already flashing and other cops around to witness and calls him a bitch, he is going to jail and he might die. I believe that like the way I believe the sun heats the Earth.

 

[comment101]

Don't care what color the person is... That was uncalled for. He's a public servant and should learn how to restraint himself. You can insult the cop all you want as long as you don't threat or touch him.

 

[michigantoga]

Savage

 

[BigDaddyBuk]

The cop said he had to leave because what was going on was none of his business, do you really consider that interfering?

yes, Doug, that's the text book definition of interfering. The video shows an active traffic stop. The beginning of the video shows the police officers telling Joshua Lyon to walk away. His drunk ass refused.

Debatable.

if someone was all up in your face like that yelling at you, you would think they were ready to fight.

Is there another video? He didn't say it in this one.

1:53 mark of the video, Doug.

[

Telling someone to leave an area because it's none of his business is not a lawful order.

§329. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation

A. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation is the intentional interference or obstruction of a law enforcement officer conducting investigative work at the scene of a crime or the scene of an accident by refusing to move or leave the immediate scene of the crime or the accident when ordered to do so by the law enforcement officer when the offender has reasonable grounds to believe the officer is acting in the performance of his official duties.

https://law.justia.com/codes/louisiana/2011/rs/title14/rs14-329/

Lyon had no family or friends involved in that active crime scene. He understood that it was an active crime scene. It literally wasn't his concern about how many cops it took to handle that stop.

Brothers who were minding their own business have been killed by police, and you're riding for a drunk asshole who walked up to police doing their jobs and was asked to leave several times from an active crime scene?

Really?

 

[doug777]

You have got to be kidding me with those videos!!!!

I posted those videos to counter your( Either way, every time a cop asks you to do something, do it and go home! When you don't, it never goes well) theory.

 

[doug777]

yes, Doug, that's the text book definition of interfering.

If that's how you define interfering then he would be interfering whether he was 10 feet or 500 feet away.

if someone was all up in your face like that yelling at you, you would think they were ready to fight.

He never got in the cops face until the cop illegally put his hands on him.

1:53 mark of the video, Doug.

The brother is saying that he himself has had a drink.

§329. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation

A. Interfering with a law enforcement investigation is the intentional interference or obstruction of a law enforcement officer conducting investigative work at the scene of a crime or the scene of an accident by refusing to move or leave the immediate scene of the crime or the accident when ordered to do so by the law enforcement officer when the offender has reasonable grounds to believe the officer is acting in the performance of his official duties.

https://law.justia.com/codes/louisiana/2011/rs/title14/rs14-329/

Lyon had no family or friends involved in that active crime scene. He understood that it was an active crime scene. It literally wasn't his concern about how many cops it took to handle that stop.

Brothers who were minding their own business have been killed by police, and you're riding for a drunk asshole who walked up to police doing their jobs and was asked to leave several times from an active crime scene?

Really?

Like I said if interfering is defined as mind your own business, then someone across the street in an apartment building watching through binoculars is guilty of interference.

 

[BigDaddyBuk]

If that's how you define interfering then he would be interfering whether he was 10 feet or 500 feet away.
He never got in the cops face until the cop illegally put his hands on him.
The brother is saying that he himself has had a drink. Like I said if interfering is defined as mind your own business, then someone across the street in an apartment building watching through binoculars is guilty of interference.

The lawful order that this drunk prick disregarded was to leave.

He did not leave.

The law clearly states that once you are told to leave you must leave.

He was not told to stand at a certain distance but to vacate the area.

He disregarded that lawful command, at which time the officer has reason and cause to effect an arrest.

Everything you're saying is outside of the law and has no bearing on this. Chris Lyon said he had a drink, and only a complete nincompoop couldn't tell that Joshua Lyon was with him and drunk too. It's on film and cut and dry. Lyon was charged with public intoxication and interference, and he will plead guilty to one or both.

That cop was reasonable almost to a fault.

 

[Texas Catdaddy]

The screams

 

[ORIGINAL NATION]

He was tempting the officer. I would never be a cop but if I ever was one I would have walked off. He made the officer take action when he called him out of his name.
There was one video of a white dude at a court house or something and he was steady trying to intimidate the black security there. The black officer remained calm and tried to make sure he was in the right. But he took a lot off of that white dude.