Hey, there! Log in / Register

More details emerge on Roslindale incident

By adamg on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 10:56am

The Globe has the names of the kid and the officer (the officer who has had complaints in the past) and on what the cops were doing on Washington Street that day. The Herald reports the kid might sue.

Neighborhoods: 
Roslindale


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

By Gary C on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 11:12am.

The cops stayed cool and in the end it was all fine.

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 11:19am.

Pathetic. These lawyers are shameless, as is this young man's family (looking for quick $$$). This young man was acting like an immature brat, or worse, deliberately disrupting legitimate law enforcement activity regarding crime and violence in and around Archdale projects. What makes matters worse is he and others like him who live in public housing are lucky they got it, and most likely all the other freebies they get. Instead, they behave like uncivilized savages.

How can people take the ACLU seriously when they come to the defense of obvious punks like this 18 year old man?

By Scumquistador on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 2:54pm.

I also consider people that grow up in the projects lucky

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 6:53pm.

what people who live there make it. Some are just down on their luck, others aren't necessarily bad people. Then there's a large contingent of un-civilized assholes.

Look...it's better than being homeless, and if you live in them and can do better, than why don't you? There really are decent people who would make far better tenants who could use the housing.

By Lou on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 8:56pm.

**This young man was acting like an immature brat**

Not illegal.

** or worse, deliberately disrupting legitimate law enforcement activity regarding crime and violence in and around Archdale projects.**

No one has indicated that an law enforcement activities were disrupted.

*8What makes matters worse is he and others like him who live in public housing are lucky they got it, and most likely all the other freebies they get.**

None of which has anything to do with getting arrested because you called a police officer a name.

By bulgingbuick on Thu, 08/27/2015 - 10:02am.

whats rightfully his! It is certain to open a new career front and his neighbors are sure to provide sufficient victims upon whom he can prey.

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 11:23am.

Sue for what? Just to sue?

By adamg on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 11:46am.

Violation of his rights under the First Amendment (and, if filed in state court, the equivalent article of the state constitution).

False arrest, so violation of the Fourteenth Amendment (and again, the equivalent state article, if filed in state court rather than federal court).

Possibly assault and battery?

I'm sure there are others.

Going against him, though, is the concept of qualified immunity - the police officers were clearly acting as police officers (rather than doing something off duty), so the lawyer's going to have to prove the conduct was really egregious to clear that hurdle (see the Glik case, in which a panel of federal judges ruled the arrest of a guy videoing an arrest on the Common was such an awful violation of the First Amendment that the officers involved basically lost their right to qualified immunity).

Caveat on the above: I am not a lawyer. I just read a lot of court decisions, which is hardly the same. Any actual lawyers are, of course, free to jump in. Also, I'm not saying I necessarily agree the kid should sue, but you asked ...

By dmcboston on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 2:14pm.

...if the police are trained and act within the applicable SOP for that type of incident, they're covered. If they commit an obvious violation of SOP or basic civil rights, then they might be on the hook.

One question. I noticed the esteemed videographer seemed to be shouting, "Somebody's gonna get shot" about fifty times with no pistol drawn and no apparent escalation pistolly, (if that's a word) among the crowd. So...was he inciting to riot? Even if not, he sure as hell wasn't helping.

I have an internet law degree.

By Lou on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 9:01pm.

**Sue for what? Just to sue?**

No...the police were wrong to arrest this dude.

The only way to correct this is in civil court. (A citizen can't start criminal case, so a citizen has to resort to a civil court case...)

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 11:24am.

Put your hands on your neck in a way that would constitute "choking" or "strangling". Can you talk, much less yell and resist arrest like the punk in the video? Then you're not being choked.

The police were investigating a separate incident when Vargas decided to block traffic and be an obscene little douche. Only one of those is protected by free speech. Upon being arrested for disorderly, he resisted and was physically guided into the cruiser with an appropriate escalation of force. Good luck with your suit, lil buddy.

By Malcolm Tucker on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 1:00pm.

Impressionable readers: do not try to choke yourselves.

By MattyC on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 1:04pm.

If you think you should do something any rando anonymous commenter suggests, then please do choke yourself out.

By Whurlz on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 1:20pm.

....pretty sure that was a joke? Sheesh!

By Malcolm Tucker on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 1:41pm.

I was, in fact, being facetious. Now, there's a difference between the scientist above - suggesting that we attempt choking ourselves to experience how difficult it is to yell or whatever - and your suggestion that we choke ourselves because you deem us unworthy of occupying the same airspace as you. Not nice, Matty. Ten minutes in time-out.

By Felicity on Thu, 08/27/2015 - 1:02pm.

That's incorrect. Choking =/= inability to speak.
Look at Eric Garner.

Also, choking isn't just an airway issue. 11lbs of pressure applied to the carotid arteries for 10 seconds, can kill a person.

Abusers like choking, because it doesn't show visible signs of injury.

By Lmo on Thu, 08/27/2015 - 3:46pm.

How
Much pressure did the officer apply in this instance?

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 11:49am.

For some ridiculous amount, can we kick this punk out of public housing?

By roadman on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 2:14pm.

can we fire the City's lawyer? And then get the courts to overturn their idiotic decision that yelling derogatory comments at a cop is protected speech.

By Waquiot on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 2:55pm.

You're making a big assumption, there.

All we know is that the incident happened on Washington Street, and the video was taken at the corner of Washington and Lesher. None of this is in the projects.

By relaxyapsycho on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 3:07pm.

But it's not a BIG assumption.

By Waquiot on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 3:18pm.

And walking by a triple decker on Washington Street every day that was the scene of an unsolved double homicide, it's not a small assumption, either.

By Markk02474 on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 4:24pm.

Because really, what other realistic income opportunities does a kid with his [edit: study studies] and skillz and have?

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 3:18pm.

Man, I wish my house had a study but we only have a guest bedroom/home office. You mean like with wood paneling and a fireplace, maybe some nice glass front bookshelves? That would be sweet.

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 3:15pm.

Is calling for protests because of this.

https://digboston.com/dear-national-media-please-cover-police-brutality-...

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 5:51pm.

Will break the accelerator pedal while flooring it if he ever encounters one of those "innocent brutalized teens" in real life. And definitely break his fingers mashing the windows and locks buttons.

By adamg on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 6:19pm.

Because you wouldn't be saying that if you had (and yeah, I've met him, even had dinner with him).

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 6:39pm.

doesn't mean he's tough.

By anon on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 10:38pm.

That must have been the most snarky, anti-police dinner ever.

By adamg on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 11:02pm.

But no, we mostly talked about the independent journalism thing he's starting up. Sorry to disappoint you.

By Roslindaler on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 4:56pm.

It is beyond me why some civil rights groups choose to use incidents like this to draw awareness to the issue of police brutality. The video shows a group of police officers in full control of their emotions and actions arresting someone who was behaving horribly and was engaged in disorderly conduct. It does not appear from the video that he was being "choked" but rather that the officers were trying to place him in a patrol car following his arrest and placed a hand on his neck when he physically resisted. We don't know what was going on before the videos started, and so it is possible that these young people were just minding their own business when set upon by camera wielding police. However, in light of their conduct towards the officers reflected on the video, and the fact that no one has suggested they were just minding their own business before, I see no basis to think that this is what happened. There are many examples of police brutality around the country, and there may well be examples of it in Boston that I am unaware of. But using this person's experience as an example of police misconduct distracts from the real issue, and is a horrible mistake if you are trying to garner sympathy to the cause.

By Lou on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 8:18pm.

"disorderly conduct" is the police catch all for any reason an officer wants to arrest someone and show authority.

This is one of the most abused charges, and most of them are dropped.

If an officer wants to put someone in the back of their police car and drive them to the police station (where they will have the upper hand) a "disorderly charge is the way to do it.

This kid/guy got arrested because the cop didn't like what he said...in spite of living in a country which cherishes and values free speech.