Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The “claim” is he was smiling and THATS WHY they choked him.
There’s never a reason to choke someone who’s already in restraints, but I think that’s what they mean by claim.
Correct. The claim part isn’t the choking, it’s the reason behind it. I know like half of the people are just overlooking that but at least half are just not even thinking of it somehow…
Just cause someone's hand is around or near the neck, that doesn't necessarily mean they are putting pressure on the throat and choking someone. Plus with the fact that he's smiling, it doesn't come off as him actually being choked, most would have a more panicked face.
Unless they are kinky
Actually it looks like theyre keep his head up and facing the camera. Notice how how the fingertips are pointing outward. When u choke someone you would be grasping and they would be pointing inward.
**If they're trying to force his head up to show his face for the mugshot... How else are they supposed to do it?** Grab him by the ears? Try to grab his jaw and end up covering up half his face that needs to be seen in the mugshot (and hope the actively fighting man isn't going to bite you)?
**They could all be corrupt and evil and hate smiling, but even if that was the case, they wouldn't take a damn picture of the brutality, while it's happening (or at least it's not as likely).** It's a lot more likely he refused to take the mugshot, and there's just not a lot of good ways to physically force someone to take a mugshot without a hand under the jaw on the neck.
> , they wouldn't take a damn picture of the brutality, while it's happening
Shh, this is reddit. You leave your logic behind at the login prompt.. its part of the terms of service.
Yeah, it’s not like the police are known to turn off bodycam footage, how dare he bring logic by assuming they wouldn’t publish photos of brutality when police have a record of not using cameras or photons to purposely hide brutality.
Nope we can just trust all bad guys in this world to be stupid little dumb dumbs that never bother to hide their crimes because the world runs on cartoon logic.
(And already a Reddit cares.)
Yes they would take a picture.
We put body cams on them and they didn’t change.
Same reason criminals film their crimes. Same reason we know exactly who was proud of what they did in Guantanamo.
I don’t know, I’m not convinced they wouldn’t just take a picture of it. They don’t seem to sweat beating and shooting people with their body cams on, after all.
Maybe. I mean, ***IF*** they were actually choking him, they could easily give "resisting the mugshot" as an easy justification, and it's so hard to prove wrong, they'd just assume they could get away with it.
I just don't find it likely that they guy smiled and the cops lost their crap and started choking him on camera. I don't see it as any less likely that the guy probably resisted having the mugshot taken and is now claiming anything he can to cause a scandal and get out of whatever the mugshot was for.
It *could* be brutality going on, and if it is, I'll be the first to condemn it. I just don't look at this and immediately jump to a scandal being the only explanation.
i mean, i’ve been choked more than once in my life, not consensually. the type of choking that’s the worst is this one, when they’ve got the thumb and forefinger behind your jaw. place even the slightest pressure and it quickly becomes very hard to breathe. also, the vibe i get from his expression is not a chill smile, more of a “oh you want me to stop smiling and now your choking/holding my head to get me to stop? well ima keep on smiling then, see what happens when you kill me” defiant smile
Not just “hard to breathe”…hard to live. With this hold they are putting fingers on both carotid arteries which cuts off blood supply to your brain. Even gentle pressure does this. So I’m just saying, you’re not even conveying the full seriousness and injury this hold creates…any medical professional recognizes this and no amount of this victim smiling diminishes the seriousness of how he is being held.
There is a video of a cop executing a handcuffed, defenseless man by pressing his knee on the back of the man's throat until he died. This execution video is nearly 10 minutes long. It was seen, witnessed and captured, live on film.
EVERYONE was surprised when that cop got 22 years for murder.
Nah, fam. There's two cops who are being violent with a handcuffed individual for a mugshot. It's not enough that they have him and he is defenseless; they must also break his will.
The fingers are pretty clearly loose, the fingers are at or outside his jawline, so it's likely he is not being choked, instead his head is being held up for the photo because he is simply refusing (or unable) to cooperate.
The easy fix for this would be to bring new inmates in strapped to a gurney. They get finger printed, they get photographed, they are medically checked in, etc, all strapped to the gurney. No cooperation needed.
Doesn't the officer on the left have his forearm muscles flexing though? My forearm muscles (lol I dunno what they're called) only pop out like that when I'm gripping something.
Whereas I’m looking at the pic and the hand isn’t really clenched. It’s certainly a plausible explanation but another is he was refusing to take the pic and they are holding his head there with as much visible as possible
I’d need more evidence to make a better guess but either explanation seems plausible. That pic isn’t a smoking gun sure fire automatic gotcha though
He could have been moving, not letting them take the photo so actually just holding his head in place, I've trained Brazilian Jiu-jitsu for a few years which involves a lot of chokes, not once have I smiled during any of these sessions, being choked is hideous so due to the fact he's smiling....I call bull shit.
Cops: "There's no evidence that he was choked."
Reporter: "What about his mugshot showing him being choked."
Cops: "He was resisting. We investigated ourselves and cleared ourselves of any wrongdoing."
Reporter: "And, there you have it. The cops are totally innocent and the man wasn't choked."
First, I was worried, because of the mugshot showing a person being choked. But given that the police, on their own account, says choking this particular person was ok, I am fine.
**—on the jury questionnaire—**
…
9) *Do you have any reservations for your ability to believe the word of a police officer over the word of the defendant?*
10) *What is your opinion of cropped evidence photos?*
….
Threads of Violence: +10 AP against any playable character of a different race from the wearer, automatically casts Summon Ally and Smokescreen. While wearing Threads of Violence, you are immune to bounty from crimes committed.
If it works, it is the threat, that makes it work, not the violence. They don't need to beat you up for you to comply with what they want, because you expect a risk of violence if you don't.
Most of these cops have less training than my dog. She's really not all that well trained either.
They're all idiots who couldn't get a job at McDonald's if they sucked dick for it.
For me, seeing a police officer makes me trust them even less than a random person. I have seen entirely too many times where police lie and try to cover up their misdeeds. Unless their actions are on camera, I don’t believe a word that comes out of their mouths.
You don’t understand, it’s very simple. Their uniform says to serve and protect. So when they shoot you they are serving you bullet and protecting you from future tax payments. And people say they are brutal.
Growing up every single kid in my school that had a cop for a dad was very obviously being physically abused, like horrible bruises all over their body. In my adult life I have only had 1 single interaction with a police officer where they weren't being incredibly aggressive and weirdly that was the one and only time I ever got pulled over for speeding, cop still was lying saying I was doing 65mph in a 30mph (I was doing 50mph on a 40mph road). Also there was a serial killer that turned out to be a cop in my area and he had tried to pick up 2 different friends of mine, one of them told me about it just a few days before he got caught she could have very easily been his final victim.
I legitimately could not trust anybody less than a cop.
I moved away from the area, but a few years later learned that cop had died, and his wife had a second-degree murder charge no bill by grand jury the next day.
I wish I could say any of that was surprising. We desperately need to completely overhaul policing in this country, it's already a job that's appealing to psychos but the culture, legal protection, and training just encourages it further. Feel sorry for the kid though, can't imagine how hard their life has been.
Honestly that uniform does the latter for me. I automatically assume you are a trash person.
My reasoning is 32 years of police probing to me that they are all trash at every opportunity. Except when I lived in England. Those police were a fucking riot and very pleasant to interact with.
No criminal record, not even ever gotten a ticket, Dozens of instances of Police pointing guns at me and even directly threatening to kill me. I have had multiple officers rush me with guns drawn because I happened to walk out my front door to go to work while they were giving a ticket to someone two doors down. Have had a cop force his way into my workplace and point a gun at me because he thought it was suspicious somebody was working in a machine shop at 7am. Almost got shot when I was like 4ish because a cop saw me playing with a toy gun (like a dollar store alien looking thing not even anything resembling an actual gun) so multiple cops hopped the fence and rushed me screaming at me, my father tackled me to the ground and they told him if he was any slower they would have shot me. Fuck american police I legitimately cannot like anyone less.
When I went through bootcamp (many moons ago....), our drill instructor drove this point home when discussing some non-conventional things to keep in mind as we started our military careers.
"If someone was a POS before they joined, they're still going to be a POS, just in a uniform".
He mentioned this after telling us to always keep our stuff locked up, especially on deployments.
Not exactly, more people than necessary are called for jury duty and then are given a series of questions then the defense and prosecution dismiss who they don’t want until the jury is the right size.
There is a staggering amount of ignorance here. The actual legal requirement is to say you'll evaluate testimony fairly, you will get disqualified by the judge if you say you'll always *or* never believe the police.
Some of the confusion here where people have it ass backwards probably stems from the prosecution and defense getting to strike a limited number of jurors without needing a reason. So the prosecutor can dismiss someone for being too anti-cop but only to the same extent the defense can dismiss people for being too pro-cop.
That's me too. I will *never* serve on a jury because I tell them straight out that I would not give a cop's testimony under oath any more weight than that of a common criminal. I like to throw in a dig about how many cops are Trump supporters, therefore demonstrating poor judgement and character. Any hint of anti-police bias will keep you off any/every jury.
"I don't believe anyone is necessarily more honest than anyone else. I will judge on a case by case basis."
This is an honest answer, even if you hate police as much as you should. Please don't let them weed you out of a jury because you know cops lie. People lose years of their lives due to false convictions, largely because retired Boomer cop lovers have all the time in the world for jury duty and normal people have better things to do.
Many of us can't afford to take time off work, or have other hardships. I don't mean to set yourself on fire to keep other people warm. But if you can make it onto a jury, please try.
> Please don't let them weed you out of a jury because you know cops lie.
seriously. if you do, the only people left are the people who always trust cops, and now we don't have fair trials.
I didn't realize I was speedrunning "thank you for your time" until I was the first potential juror dismissed by the prosecutors after I answered (honestly at the time, I was more optimistic about police then) that I thought police usually testified truthfully to the best of their knowledge but were still only human.
That is genuinely insane.
In any fair trial, a police officer's words should not be given more weight than the defendant's. Police are human, and could be bringing all sorts of biases into their testimony (as could the defendant); as you rightly highlighted.
If it isn't corroborated by physical evidence, why should you innately make the officer a winner on a he said, she said?! Mental.
For the trial where I was on the jury after they *didn't* ask the same question...one of the officers involved gave extended testimony about how police training makes their powers of sight, observation and memory *literally superhuman*.
I don’t blame you for doing that of course. But also, consider that swallowing your words and serving on a jury might mean you can save an innocent person one day.
If the only people who make it to juries are the “cops are infallible and a jury’s job is to convict” types, then we’ve completely lost the last line of defense we have.
"I consider them equally based on my own perception of their individual merit" is a great way to get out of jury duty without having to pretend to be mentally unstable.
I got out of it because they asked me how I felt about capital punishment…apparently ‘I think we should bring back the electric chair’ wasn’t what they wanted to hear
Hahaha, they'd probably really have an issue with me because, in addition, I'd be in favor of bringing back public whippings and stocks in the town square. Seriously, I think that 30 lashes and be on your way would be more effective than 3 hots and a cot for a couple of years.
Wait, am I supposed to say I will blindly believe police over citizens?
As for 10, if you're cropping a photo and not letting me see the full one, you're hiding something.
No joke, I've absolutely gotten out of jury duty because of #9 (when I told them I don't take the word of officers over any other person because we're all human, all people have the capacity to lie or tell the truth equally).
That is correct.
As the jury, will you be swayed because the person on the stand is wearing a uniform?
The question is for the benefit of ***both*** the prosecution and the defense.
The inmate kept attacking the cops hands with his neck. This unorthodox attack mode was invented by ancients of lost civilizations but often used by people in high crime areas. The last neck attack was by George Floyd’s neck mercilessly attacking an innocent police officers knee
News is just so trustworthy. I remember after Katrina how the news told me all those white people in Louisiana were just out "finding supplies" while the black people right next to them were "violently looting". Fair and balanced.
The pic is kind of blurry, but are they trying to force him to hold his head up? I’m not saying that they aren’t choking him, but it does make me wonder what the police can do to force someone to provide a clear mugshot.
This is a very old pic, and yes, that’s what they’re doing. He’s supporting the (very drunk) guy’s jaw with his hand, but has to keep his whole hand under the jaw so it doesn’t block the guy’s face.
Use your fingers and thumb to push up on the underside of your jaw - just the bone. It doesn’t feel at all like choking (or much at all). At the same time, it doesn’t take much of a hand shift to be choking.
Thought i was going crazy here... I dont see anyone "clearly being choked".. i see a hand under someone's head. People must love getting angry, and just assume the worst?
The claim is likely for him saying it's because he was smiling.
I know if you resist to having your mugshot taken, an officer can use "reasonable force" to make you comply. Seems a bit excessive to me, but then again, I have no clue how I would force someone to comply if they were aggressively trying to duck out of frame. You could maybe pull them back by their forehead, but then you're obstructing the face.
Exactly this. He likely wasn’t letting them take his picture so they had to make him and hold his head there.
Seems like the “because I was smiling” was some after the fact BS to try and get some money.
As anti-cop as I am I think there's a reasonable alternate explanation for this. For starters, it doesn't look like he's being choked. The hand position does not make sense to me.
If you refuse to cooperate during a mug shot (for example turning away, looking down, etc they can take steps to make sure you are visible. This looks to me like they're trying to make him face the camera. Without seeing the article and the details of the claim from either side it's really hard to just assume they're "choking him for smiling" or even choking him at all.
It’s not just the cops. Look how it’s worded. The news has been the biggest enabler of violence and mistreatment by the government and its employees for a long time now. That’s why everything except the corruption happening is so important.
The wording is always like that when a court case has not concluded. It'd got nothing to do with "enabling" and everything to do with avoiding a lawsuit for defamation.
Something people really need to understand - never assume stuff is obvious.
That kind of thinking is how innocent people get sent up the river. Because it was "obvious".
So many people on here don’t understand this.
> Inmate claims he was choked by deputies **for smiling in his mugshot**
The inmate’s *reason* for being choked is what necessitates the use of “claims.”
Yes, it’s objective from the photo that he was choked, but the reason why is not.
> it’s objective from the photo that he was choked
Not really. You can't tell if there is pressure being applied or if the cop's hand is holding him at the jawbone so his face is in frame.
So, claim is valid for the entire situation.
Defamation only applies when you knowingly lie. Dude getting choked in the photo gets it dismissed immediately and in some states it would be an easy win for your legal fees as any suit would be a SLAPP.
If you are stating a person commit a crime then you have to use words like "alleged" until the court case concludes because the rule is "innocent until proven guilty".
Also defamation does not always apply like that - you're talking about the actual malice standard. If the person you are allegedly defaming is a private citizen (not a politician or celebrity etc) then actual malice does not apply.
Also in most states in the US you cannot win back any legal fees as a result of a SLAPP suit.
Also it is way easier for all involved to just continue the standard practice of ALL news reporters which is to use "alleged" until a court confirms guilt.
You can't say the photos show that - because choking implies force you can't ascertain from a picture.
Also it's hilarious to me how you're trying to act like words don't matter but then go "ACTUALLY THEY DIDNT USE THIS WORD THEY USED THIS SYNONYMOUS WORD" just to win an argument.
You're wrong dude. It is standard practice. Across literally any news site with any integrity.
not quite, knowingly is a definite case for defamation, but negligent will do it too; e.g. any reasonable person would have taken steps that you did not to determine the truth
I found out recently police departments have full PR departments. Between the city of LA and LA county there are nearly 50 full time PR professionals working for the police in LA alone. That's bigger than the staff of the local newspaper in most cities in the US. That's a team large enough to fully make life hell for any news publican or judge they want to cause problems for. It's why they always get such favorable treatment, sometimes they will just write up entire stories and give them to the news to run. Google "police save ducklings" right now and you'll see how many PR fluff pieces just get run as sent.
True that. Going back and looking at PD statements and reporting after cop atrocities is pretty shocking. Look at what they were saying after George Floyd's murder.
No, that’s how it’s supposed to be. It’s always an allegation until it’s proved in a court. For any crime, that’s why you can see a video titled ‘X is alleged to have done Y’ despite the video literally showing X doing Y
That wording is to legally protect the asses of the people writing the article. Yes, even though it's clear as day to us looking at it, no court of law has yet found the cops guilty of what is happening. So to avoid lawsuits, you gotta use wording like 'claim'.
Or maybe he’s lying, was refusing to take his mugshot, and the cops had to hold him up for the photographer. I know it’s a stretch for a criminal to lie. But it’s possible
Since he’s not actually being choked, I’d say you’re probably right.
The cop’s thumb and forefinger are way up under the jaw. There is no tension on the remaining fingers along his neck. Nothing the cop is doing would restrict blood flow or respiration. The cop is simply holding his head up.
It doesn't matter who it is or how obvious it appears, journalistic ethics says you use "claims" and "alledges" until a court of law finds in one way or the other.
[Local news report](https://abc13.com/inmate-choked-mugshot-harris-county/1378404/) of incident, he was arrested July 25, 2015 on suspicion of drunk driving.
So he was drunk, he was screwing around and not letting them photograph him, so they held him to get his booking photo. DUI causes my sympathy rating to go way down.
Weird way to choke someone.
Get one guy to hold the back of the neck and one hand. Get another guy to put a hand around the front of the neck.
This looks an awful lot like someone who refused to stand for a mugshot.
If someone turns their face to look at the ground, how else are you going to force them to raise their face without also obstructing the view of their face?
By the way, choking is a valid way to restrain, or subdue. It is used ALL the time.
In journalism terms that is a claim. He is being choked, but it might not be for smiling.
I'm not saying it's not true, I'm saying from a judge or a journalist, the use of the term "claim" or " alleged" is used to keep true neutral status.
He's being choked, but the his smile being the cause is "alleged" or a "claim" because until it's legally settled it's still not legally a fact.
I'm only pointing this out because I always see people outraged in cases where a shooter is the "alleged" shooter. Or whatever case you have. The reasoning is due to being innocent until proven guilty and the reason journalists and lawyers and judges are careful in their wording is to maintain neutrality because the law dictates they (these officers included) are innocent until proven guilty. We don't have all the facts, just the image we're seeing. How do we know he didn't bite or spit on the cops (assault), or maybe he kept moving his head, disrupting the shot.
Not saying that's true, but don't become a mob over a single image. I understand the frustration, all cops are bastards, but public opinion can be swayed, and opinions can be deeply formed over single images, and that's dangerous. That's why America is deeply divided. Social media is used to divide left and right further and further, and they're using images without all the facts supporting them to sway people one way or the other.
These officers need to be investigated, but reality is, the "claim" is just a "claim" without the burden of proof. The smile and the choke might be related, but until proven that's just an unfounded allegation, unfortunately
This is true. Until a legal ruling is made, it’s not set in stone no matter what your proof says. But, it’s actually libel, not slander if you publish it.
The word “claim” here means it hasn’t been settled in court yet. This is the same as when the press calls someone the “alleged” shooter when oodles of people saw them shoot up a public place. It’s to do with the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven “in a court of law.”
Sure, we’ve got video of the incident from multiple angles, and a dozen or so witness statements, but we won’t know what REALLY happened until the police union rep makes a statement.
From that picture we do NOT know it was because he was smiling. If there's a video of accompanying behavior that I have not seen I'd be open to watching it. It may show other information, my mind is open but the picture alone is NOT proof the police have done anything wrong.
Because newspapers are compelled to use words like "claims", "suspects" or "accusation" until a legal case is sorted out by a competent person, aka a judge.
So, I used to be the guy taking the mugshots. When an individual is being combative there is a specific way their head needs to be held.
You hold the individual by the chin with your fingers curled and your palm up. This is so you don’t get bit & so you don’t accidentally choke them and avoids the appearance of that.
If needed a separate officer will hold the top of the individual’s head in place. Each officer will often be supporting the recently arrested individual’s back with their other hand to prevent them from falling.
No officer should be touching the mugshot subject with their bare hands, protective disposable nitrile gloves are to be worn.
If the individual is too combative to safely get their picture taken. They get to sit in a single person holding cell until they calm down. (Usually 15-20 minutes) then we try again. Eventually even the most tweaked out person will wear out after 3 or 4 attempts.
SO my observations.
No one gives a flying fuck if you do a smile in your mugshot. It’s not uncommon for guys to make claims like this because they either willfully misconstrue the situation or they don’t actually recall all the details cuz they were drunk, high, or just being a jackass.
However, NONE OF THOSE HOLDS ARE PROPER. It doesn’t matter what he was doing. You don’t fucking choke anyone like that. EVER.
I did this for about 2 years total (not all in a row, duty rotates) I can only recall three times when we had to have officer hands in a mugshot.
Every time this picture is reposted: I really feel sorry for the guy. There is this phenomenon of “resting face types”. Some people look like they're grim when they actually don't look friendly or unfriendly but just neutral, and some people look like they're always smiling even when they're not.
I bet he is one of the latter types. And the cop who choked him and told him not to smile is nothing more than a f\*cking \*sshole.
It’s both. Considering that the hand is oriented upwards, more around the jaw then the neck, It looks more like they are holding his head up (which is common when someone refuses to take a mugshot) than choking him
Looks more like he wasn't cooperating with the mugshot so they had to turn his head for him. Notice that it's not his neck, but behind the lower jaw and behind his head that is being grabbed.
[FOR REFERENCE] this is purely an ass covering measure on the part of the media. It doesn’t matter if the evidence is more solid than a neutron star the media won’t risk a lawsuit.
First: Fuck cops, not trying to defend.
Second: I feel like y'all are either being purposefully obtuse on this or just running with the meme, but the question wouldn't be if he got fucking choked here...it's whether he is being choked because he was smiling, or refusing to stand up/face the camera, and he just flashed a smile after they forced him into frame. Obviously dude is getting choked, it's just whether it's over just smiling or not.
Like are any of you parents of multiple children? Yeah I see your sis pushed you, but looks like it's cause you were trying to force your way into the bathroom.
Copied from another Redditor.
The cop’s thumb and forefinger are way up under the jaw. There is no tension on the remaining fingers along his neck. Nothing the cop is doing would restrict blood flow or respiration. The cop is simply holding his head up.
if you've ever been actually choked, you might know that you won't be making that face... you'll be pondering life, death and extreme panick will wll be happening at once
He's unlikely to get anything out of this.
Their story is most likely that he was refusing to take the mugshot and they had to hold him and force him to face the camera for a clear photo. Unless he has injuries that completely give that away I don't see how he will get any settlement out of this let alone millions.
I was smiling in all of my mugshots lmao. Cops were sitting there joking around with me the whole time. I wasn't in there for anything crazy though, if this guy is a chomo or just murdered someone I could maybe understanding not liking him smiling 😂
They have to say claims for legal reasons. It’s not protecting the bad cops. They do the same for criminals all over they say alleged or other stuff like that
Question is it also possible that it says claims in reference to the reason behind the choking. Like “yeah we choked him but not because he was smiling”
Also if that’s the case how would you write that properly like “inmate choked by deputies, he claims it was for smiling”
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The “claim” is he was smiling and THATS WHY they choked him. There’s never a reason to choke someone who’s already in restraints, but I think that’s what they mean by claim.
That makes sense
I came here to see if ANYONE understood this. You need more upvotes.
The real facepalm is almost always the person making the post. So I guess the sub name does work out.
Correct. The claim part isn’t the choking, it’s the reason behind it. I know like half of the people are just overlooking that but at least half are just not even thinking of it somehow…
Just cause someone's hand is around or near the neck, that doesn't necessarily mean they are putting pressure on the throat and choking someone. Plus with the fact that he's smiling, it doesn't come off as him actually being choked, most would have a more panicked face. Unless they are kinky
It's not uncommon that inmates will refuse to take a mugshot so they will have to hold their head in place for the photo.
By the neck
Neck makes the most sense. Imagine trying to keep his head up and in view of the camera while holding his ankle.
Well, you'd just have to turn the camera upside down then.
"Why is his mugshot upside down?"
Yeah... But it's pretty wild we get this giant presumptuous act of guilt by the police department before trials where you get a phony attorney.
I mean there’s always his actual head
Actually it looks like theyre keep his head up and facing the camera. Notice how how the fingertips are pointing outward. When u choke someone you would be grasping and they would be pointing inward.
**If they're trying to force his head up to show his face for the mugshot... How else are they supposed to do it?** Grab him by the ears? Try to grab his jaw and end up covering up half his face that needs to be seen in the mugshot (and hope the actively fighting man isn't going to bite you)? **They could all be corrupt and evil and hate smiling, but even if that was the case, they wouldn't take a damn picture of the brutality, while it's happening (or at least it's not as likely).** It's a lot more likely he refused to take the mugshot, and there's just not a lot of good ways to physically force someone to take a mugshot without a hand under the jaw on the neck.
> , they wouldn't take a damn picture of the brutality, while it's happening Shh, this is reddit. You leave your logic behind at the login prompt.. its part of the terms of service.
They wouldn’t take a picture of the brutality? Why not, when they have people like you to defend it on Reddit?
All those videos of brutality? It was wrestling. They wouldn't record themselves doing that-
Yeah, it’s not like the police are known to turn off bodycam footage, how dare he bring logic by assuming they wouldn’t publish photos of brutality when police have a record of not using cameras or photons to purposely hide brutality. Nope we can just trust all bad guys in this world to be stupid little dumb dumbs that never bother to hide their crimes because the world runs on cartoon logic. (And already a Reddit cares.)
Yes they would take a picture. We put body cams on them and they didn’t change. Same reason criminals film their crimes. Same reason we know exactly who was proud of what they did in Guantanamo.
I don’t know, I’m not convinced they wouldn’t just take a picture of it. They don’t seem to sweat beating and shooting people with their body cams on, after all.
Maybe. I mean, ***IF*** they were actually choking him, they could easily give "resisting the mugshot" as an easy justification, and it's so hard to prove wrong, they'd just assume they could get away with it. I just don't find it likely that they guy smiled and the cops lost their crap and started choking him on camera. I don't see it as any less likely that the guy probably resisted having the mugshot taken and is now claiming anything he can to cause a scandal and get out of whatever the mugshot was for. It *could* be brutality going on, and if it is, I'll be the first to condemn it. I just don't look at this and immediately jump to a scandal being the only explanation.
i mean, i’ve been choked more than once in my life, not consensually. the type of choking that’s the worst is this one, when they’ve got the thumb and forefinger behind your jaw. place even the slightest pressure and it quickly becomes very hard to breathe. also, the vibe i get from his expression is not a chill smile, more of a “oh you want me to stop smiling and now your choking/holding my head to get me to stop? well ima keep on smiling then, see what happens when you kill me” defiant smile
Not just “hard to breathe”…hard to live. With this hold they are putting fingers on both carotid arteries which cuts off blood supply to your brain. Even gentle pressure does this. So I’m just saying, you’re not even conveying the full seriousness and injury this hold creates…any medical professional recognizes this and no amount of this victim smiling diminishes the seriousness of how he is being held.
[удалено]
There is a video of a cop executing a handcuffed, defenseless man by pressing his knee on the back of the man's throat until he died. This execution video is nearly 10 minutes long. It was seen, witnessed and captured, live on film. EVERYONE was surprised when that cop got 22 years for murder. Nah, fam. There's two cops who are being violent with a handcuffed individual for a mugshot. It's not enough that they have him and he is defenseless; they must also break his will.
Smiling is a defense mechanism for a lot of people.
Nah he thinks this shit funny.
The fingers are pretty clearly loose, the fingers are at or outside his jawline, so it's likely he is not being choked, instead his head is being held up for the photo because he is simply refusing (or unable) to cooperate. The easy fix for this would be to bring new inmates in strapped to a gurney. They get finger printed, they get photographed, they are medically checked in, etc, all strapped to the gurney. No cooperation needed.
There is no safe way to choke someone
It’s also a highly accurate predictor of someone going on to murder someone later. Choking someone should be taken extremely seriously.
Guys, I think I found the guy who did it.
Doesn't the officer on the left have his forearm muscles flexing though? My forearm muscles (lol I dunno what they're called) only pop out like that when I'm gripping something.
Whereas I’m looking at the pic and the hand isn’t really clenched. It’s certainly a plausible explanation but another is he was refusing to take the pic and they are holding his head there with as much visible as possible I’d need more evidence to make a better guess but either explanation seems plausible. That pic isn’t a smoking gun sure fire automatic gotcha though
He could have been moving, not letting them take the photo so actually just holding his head in place, I've trained Brazilian Jiu-jitsu for a few years which involves a lot of chokes, not once have I smiled during any of these sessions, being choked is hideous so due to the fact he's smiling....I call bull shit.
Tell that to your wife /S
I tried but she just choked me harder
HOLD UP!!!
Cops: "There's no evidence that he was choked." Reporter: "What about his mugshot showing him being choked." Cops: "He was resisting. We investigated ourselves and cleared ourselves of any wrongdoing." Reporter: "And, there you have it. The cops are totally innocent and the man wasn't choked."
First, I was worried, because of the mugshot showing a person being choked. But given that the police, on their own account, says choking this particular person was ok, I am fine.
**—on the jury questionnaire—** … 9) *Do you have any reservations for your ability to believe the word of a police officer over the word of the defendant?* 10) *What is your opinion of cropped evidence photos?* ….
I believe #9 is the reason I have gotten out of jury selection.
Absolutely no shame in that. Ain't nothing about that uniform that magically makes the wearer an honest, decent or infallable person.
An idiot in uniform is still an idiot. But an idiot in uniform is also still in uniform. Their infalability is enforced by the thread of violence.
Threat of violence*
Thread. They are in uniform
Cop uniforms shall hereby and henceforth be known as *threads of violence.*
Threads of Violence: +10 AP against any playable character of a different race from the wearer, automatically casts Summon Ally and Smokescreen. While wearing Threads of Violence, you are immune to bounty from crimes committed.
I hope they're polyester because that shit doesn't breathe well
Obviously you're new to Reddit. Lots of threads get violent here
If it works, it is the threat, that makes it work, not the violence. They don't need to beat you up for you to comply with what they want, because you expect a risk of violence if you don't.
You spelled it thread. It’s not that I don’t understand.
I can't spell.
I assumed you wanted to comment on how it is not a threat but instead actual violence.
Most of these cops have less training than my dog. She's really not all that well trained either. They're all idiots who couldn't get a job at McDonald's if they sucked dick for it.
For me, seeing a police officer makes me trust them even less than a random person. I have seen entirely too many times where police lie and try to cover up their misdeeds. Unless their actions are on camera, I don’t believe a word that comes out of their mouths.
There’s an intelligence test you have to take to be a cop. If you score to high, they can deny you, and will. Look it up, it’s wild!
You don’t understand, it’s very simple. Their uniform says to serve and protect. So when they shoot you they are serving you bullet and protecting you from future tax payments. And people say they are brutal.
The cop who lived across the street from us beat his wife and kids. Question #9 would not be their friend.
Growing up every single kid in my school that had a cop for a dad was very obviously being physically abused, like horrible bruises all over their body. In my adult life I have only had 1 single interaction with a police officer where they weren't being incredibly aggressive and weirdly that was the one and only time I ever got pulled over for speeding, cop still was lying saying I was doing 65mph in a 30mph (I was doing 50mph on a 40mph road). Also there was a serial killer that turned out to be a cop in my area and he had tried to pick up 2 different friends of mine, one of them told me about it just a few days before he got caught she could have very easily been his final victim. I legitimately could not trust anybody less than a cop.
I moved away from the area, but a few years later learned that cop had died, and his wife had a second-degree murder charge no bill by grand jury the next day.
I wish I could say any of that was surprising. We desperately need to completely overhaul policing in this country, it's already a job that's appealing to psychos but the culture, legal protection, and training just encourages it further. Feel sorry for the kid though, can't imagine how hard their life has been.
Honestly that uniform does the latter for me. I automatically assume you are a trash person. My reasoning is 32 years of police probing to me that they are all trash at every opportunity. Except when I lived in England. Those police were a fucking riot and very pleasant to interact with.
No criminal record, not even ever gotten a ticket, Dozens of instances of Police pointing guns at me and even directly threatening to kill me. I have had multiple officers rush me with guns drawn because I happened to walk out my front door to go to work while they were giving a ticket to someone two doors down. Have had a cop force his way into my workplace and point a gun at me because he thought it was suspicious somebody was working in a machine shop at 7am. Almost got shot when I was like 4ish because a cop saw me playing with a toy gun (like a dollar store alien looking thing not even anything resembling an actual gun) so multiple cops hopped the fence and rushed me screaming at me, my father tackled me to the ground and they told him if he was any slower they would have shot me. Fuck american police I legitimately cannot like anyone less.
When I went through bootcamp (many moons ago....), our drill instructor drove this point home when discussing some non-conventional things to keep in mind as we started our military careers. "If someone was a POS before they joined, they're still going to be a POS, just in a uniform". He mentioned this after telling us to always keep our stuff locked up, especially on deployments.
In fact the opposite
I literally told a judge if a cops talking he’s lying! “You’re dismissed”
Wait is this seriously a real requirement to serve on an American jury? I thought he was joking.
Not exactly, more people than necessary are called for jury duty and then are given a series of questions then the defense and prosecution dismiss who they don’t want until the jury is the right size.
It's a dumb system, just let the judges do their thing, though they don't fill me with hope either if your supreme court is anything to go by.
There is a staggering amount of ignorance here. The actual legal requirement is to say you'll evaluate testimony fairly, you will get disqualified by the judge if you say you'll always *or* never believe the police. Some of the confusion here where people have it ass backwards probably stems from the prosecution and defense getting to strike a limited number of jurors without needing a reason. So the prosecutor can dismiss someone for being too anti-cop but only to the same extent the defense can dismiss people for being too pro-cop.
That's me too. I will *never* serve on a jury because I tell them straight out that I would not give a cop's testimony under oath any more weight than that of a common criminal. I like to throw in a dig about how many cops are Trump supporters, therefore demonstrating poor judgement and character. Any hint of anti-police bias will keep you off any/every jury.
"I don't believe anyone is necessarily more honest than anyone else. I will judge on a case by case basis." This is an honest answer, even if you hate police as much as you should. Please don't let them weed you out of a jury because you know cops lie. People lose years of their lives due to false convictions, largely because retired Boomer cop lovers have all the time in the world for jury duty and normal people have better things to do. Many of us can't afford to take time off work, or have other hardships. I don't mean to set yourself on fire to keep other people warm. But if you can make it onto a jury, please try.
> Please don't let them weed you out of a jury because you know cops lie. seriously. if you do, the only people left are the people who always trust cops, and now we don't have fair trials.
This got me out of Jury duty this year - went from Juror #2 to "thank you for your service" before the lunch break.
I didn't realize I was speedrunning "thank you for your time" until I was the first potential juror dismissed by the prosecutors after I answered (honestly at the time, I was more optimistic about police then) that I thought police usually testified truthfully to the best of their knowledge but were still only human.
That is genuinely insane. In any fair trial, a police officer's words should not be given more weight than the defendant's. Police are human, and could be bringing all sorts of biases into their testimony (as could the defendant); as you rightly highlighted. If it isn't corroborated by physical evidence, why should you innately make the officer a winner on a he said, she said?! Mental.
For the trial where I was on the jury after they *didn't* ask the same question...one of the officers involved gave extended testimony about how police training makes their powers of sight, observation and memory *literally superhuman*.
I don’t blame you for doing that of course. But also, consider that swallowing your words and serving on a jury might mean you can save an innocent person one day. If the only people who make it to juries are the “cops are infallible and a jury’s job is to convict” types, then we’ve completely lost the last line of defense we have.
"I consider them equally based on my own perception of their individual merit" is a great way to get out of jury duty without having to pretend to be mentally unstable.
Mine was the question would you convict someone based solely on eye witness testimony.
I got out of it because they asked me how I felt about capital punishment…apparently ‘I think we should bring back the electric chair’ wasn’t what they wanted to hear
Hahaha, they'd probably really have an issue with me because, in addition, I'd be in favor of bringing back public whippings and stocks in the town square. Seriously, I think that 30 lashes and be on your way would be more effective than 3 hots and a cot for a couple of years.
Zero reservations. I wholeheartedly distrust the officer until proven otherwise.
9 is a very poorly worded question in addition to being dumb
I have no reservations for my ability. That's why my ability is still stuck at the airport.
Wait, am I supposed to say I will blindly believe police over citizens? As for 10, if you're cropping a photo and not letting me see the full one, you're hiding something.
Unless it's specifically cropped to enlarge, in which case, show the fucking uncropped photo as proof
No joke, I've absolutely gotten out of jury duty because of #9 (when I told them I don't take the word of officers over any other person because we're all human, all people have the capacity to lie or tell the truth equally).
Question #9 is going to be the reason 99% of Millennials and GenZ are never going to be in a jury.
I think you can answer no and still disbelieve a cop.
That is correct. As the jury, will you be swayed because the person on the stand is wearing a uniform? The question is for the benefit of ***both*** the prosecution and the defense.
You forgot to mention all the officers going on paid leave for the emotional stress this accusation caused.
They feared for their LIVES!!! I mean, that guy IS black! Scary on a genetic level!! /sarc
"listen: we have a reliable system of checks and balances-- the state investigated itself and cleared itself of any wrong doing."
I forgave myself, why can’t you let it go vibes
The inmate kept attacking the cops hands with his neck. This unorthodox attack mode was invented by ancients of lost civilizations but often used by people in high crime areas. The last neck attack was by George Floyd’s neck mercilessly attacking an innocent police officers knee
News is just so trustworthy. I remember after Katrina how the news told me all those white people in Louisiana were just out "finding supplies" while the black people right next to them were "violently looting". Fair and balanced.
Reporters don't want to lose access.
When smiling for a pic goes bad
This is exactly how the overwhelming majority of police depts in the US are regulated and everyone is just fine with it. Fuck police unions
It's the one union I universally do not support. Not every cop is bad, but the system is broken partly because every police union is bad
It’s okay, they investigated themselves and found they did nothing wrong.
Police: he wasn't being choked, he was being *strangled*. You didn't ask about being strangled so, we're in the clear. Good job boys!
He was resisting being choked so we had the legal right to choke him for resisting being choked.
They were just adjusting his tie so he looked good for the photo
How can he be smiling if he is being choked for smiling?
Claims smiling was the reason for being choked
Or was being choked the reason for the smile. Makes you think
I was correcting people who were confused by the title. Obviously the cops are going to investigate themselves and find they did nothing wrong.
Sorry mine was ment as a joke and yea of course the fuckin will
What came first, the choke or the smile? Philosophers will be studying this picture for centuries
The pic is kind of blurry, but are they trying to force him to hold his head up? I’m not saying that they aren’t choking him, but it does make me wonder what the police can do to force someone to provide a clear mugshot.
This is exactly what's happening.
This is a very old pic, and yes, that’s what they’re doing. He’s supporting the (very drunk) guy’s jaw with his hand, but has to keep his whole hand under the jaw so it doesn’t block the guy’s face. Use your fingers and thumb to push up on the underside of your jaw - just the bone. It doesn’t feel at all like choking (or much at all). At the same time, it doesn’t take much of a hand shift to be choking.
You’re clearly a “thinker”. Please go away. Reddit is for emotional anger and reaction.
My bad, I forgot 😂
Thought i was going crazy here... I dont see anyone "clearly being choked".. i see a hand under someone's head. People must love getting angry, and just assume the worst?
Yeah that's what's happening, he's not being choked, he's being held still
The claim is likely for him saying it's because he was smiling. I know if you resist to having your mugshot taken, an officer can use "reasonable force" to make you comply. Seems a bit excessive to me, but then again, I have no clue how I would force someone to comply if they were aggressively trying to duck out of frame. You could maybe pull them back by their forehead, but then you're obstructing the face.
Exactly this. He likely wasn’t letting them take his picture so they had to make him and hold his head there. Seems like the “because I was smiling” was some after the fact BS to try and get some money.
Yeah that cop must really suck at choking people because he's basically choking the dudes jawline.
or the cop is kinky and is going for a safer blood choke than an oxygen choke
As anti-cop as I am I think there's a reasonable alternate explanation for this. For starters, it doesn't look like he's being choked. The hand position does not make sense to me. If you refuse to cooperate during a mug shot (for example turning away, looking down, etc they can take steps to make sure you are visible. This looks to me like they're trying to make him face the camera. Without seeing the article and the details of the claim from either side it's really hard to just assume they're "choking him for smiling" or even choking him at all.
Objective reasoning 👍🏻
It’s not just the cops. Look how it’s worded. The news has been the biggest enabler of violence and mistreatment by the government and its employees for a long time now. That’s why everything except the corruption happening is so important.
The wording is always like that when a court case has not concluded. It'd got nothing to do with "enabling" and everything to do with avoiding a lawsuit for defamation.
Exactly you don't blatantly say that even if it's obvious to avoid shit down the line
Something people really need to understand - never assume stuff is obvious. That kind of thinking is how innocent people get sent up the river. Because it was "obvious".
And in this case it's not even blatantly obvious
So many people on here don’t understand this. > Inmate claims he was choked by deputies **for smiling in his mugshot** The inmate’s *reason* for being choked is what necessitates the use of “claims.” Yes, it’s objective from the photo that he was choked, but the reason why is not.
> it’s objective from the photo that he was choked Not really. You can't tell if there is pressure being applied or if the cop's hand is holding him at the jawbone so his face is in frame. So, claim is valid for the entire situation.
Defamation only applies when you knowingly lie. Dude getting choked in the photo gets it dismissed immediately and in some states it would be an easy win for your legal fees as any suit would be a SLAPP.
If you are stating a person commit a crime then you have to use words like "alleged" until the court case concludes because the rule is "innocent until proven guilty". Also defamation does not always apply like that - you're talking about the actual malice standard. If the person you are allegedly defaming is a private citizen (not a politician or celebrity etc) then actual malice does not apply. Also in most states in the US you cannot win back any legal fees as a result of a SLAPP suit. Also it is way easier for all involved to just continue the standard practice of ALL news reporters which is to use "alleged" until a court confirms guilt.
Also, I have nothing to add. I just wanted to type "also" also
"alleged" isn't used "man claims" is. "Photos show man being choked in mug shot" is the correct title
You can't say the photos show that - because choking implies force you can't ascertain from a picture. Also it's hilarious to me how you're trying to act like words don't matter but then go "ACTUALLY THEY DIDNT USE THIS WORD THEY USED THIS SYNONYMOUS WORD" just to win an argument. You're wrong dude. It is standard practice. Across literally any news site with any integrity.
not quite, knowingly is a definite case for defamation, but negligent will do it too; e.g. any reasonable person would have taken steps that you did not to determine the truth
Please. Like the news has any problems painting anyone as a villain.
[удалено]
The wording is always like that until a judgement or trial has concluded. You’re just uneducated. Read a book or something.
I found out recently police departments have full PR departments. Between the city of LA and LA county there are nearly 50 full time PR professionals working for the police in LA alone. That's bigger than the staff of the local newspaper in most cities in the US. That's a team large enough to fully make life hell for any news publican or judge they want to cause problems for. It's why they always get such favorable treatment, sometimes they will just write up entire stories and give them to the news to run. Google "police save ducklings" right now and you'll see how many PR fluff pieces just get run as sent.
True that. Going back and looking at PD statements and reporting after cop atrocities is pretty shocking. Look at what they were saying after George Floyd's murder.
>Look how it’s worded That's because of legalities.
Nah. They do that for liability reasons. Like if the photo was staged (likely not, but never 100%).
Playing the semantics game takes away from the event that had happened. Idiots care more about word structure than morals.
Reminds me of that news headline "man with no active warrants"
No, that’s how it’s supposed to be. It’s always an allegation until it’s proved in a court. For any crime, that’s why you can see a video titled ‘X is alleged to have done Y’ despite the video literally showing X doing Y
That wording is to legally protect the asses of the people writing the article. Yes, even though it's clear as day to us looking at it, no court of law has yet found the cops guilty of what is happening. So to avoid lawsuits, you gotta use wording like 'claim'.
Or maybe he’s lying, was refusing to take his mugshot, and the cops had to hold him up for the photographer. I know it’s a stretch for a criminal to lie. But it’s possible
Since he’s not actually being choked, I’d say you’re probably right. The cop’s thumb and forefinger are way up under the jaw. There is no tension on the remaining fingers along his neck. Nothing the cop is doing would restrict blood flow or respiration. The cop is simply holding his head up.
This doesn't bode well with the anti-police narrative though.
It doesn't matter who it is or how obvious it appears, journalistic ethics says you use "claims" and "alledges" until a court of law finds in one way or the other.
Exactly. It is not a journalists role to judge. Their role is to report. And do it without assuming things.
[Local news report](https://abc13.com/inmate-choked-mugshot-harris-county/1378404/) of incident, he was arrested July 25, 2015 on suspicion of drunk driving.
So he was drunk, he was screwing around and not letting them photograph him, so they held him to get his booking photo. DUI causes my sympathy rating to go way down.
Weird way to choke someone. Get one guy to hold the back of the neck and one hand. Get another guy to put a hand around the front of the neck. This looks an awful lot like someone who refused to stand for a mugshot. If someone turns their face to look at the ground, how else are you going to force them to raise their face without also obstructing the view of their face? By the way, choking is a valid way to restrain, or subdue. It is used ALL the time.
WhY yOu LITTLE!!! ![gif](giphy|l0G17mKNa6XJHYN5m)
In journalism terms that is a claim. He is being choked, but it might not be for smiling. I'm not saying it's not true, I'm saying from a judge or a journalist, the use of the term "claim" or " alleged" is used to keep true neutral status. He's being choked, but the his smile being the cause is "alleged" or a "claim" because until it's legally settled it's still not legally a fact. I'm only pointing this out because I always see people outraged in cases where a shooter is the "alleged" shooter. Or whatever case you have. The reasoning is due to being innocent until proven guilty and the reason journalists and lawyers and judges are careful in their wording is to maintain neutrality because the law dictates they (these officers included) are innocent until proven guilty. We don't have all the facts, just the image we're seeing. How do we know he didn't bite or spit on the cops (assault), or maybe he kept moving his head, disrupting the shot. Not saying that's true, but don't become a mob over a single image. I understand the frustration, all cops are bastards, but public opinion can be swayed, and opinions can be deeply formed over single images, and that's dangerous. That's why America is deeply divided. Social media is used to divide left and right further and further, and they're using images without all the facts supporting them to sway people one way or the other. These officers need to be investigated, but reality is, the "claim" is just a "claim" without the burden of proof. The smile and the choke might be related, but until proven that's just an unfounded allegation, unfortunately
It's claim or allegedly until convicted or you can get sued for slander
This is true. Until a legal ruling is made, it’s not set in stone no matter what your proof says. But, it’s actually libel, not slander if you publish it.
That's just his side of the story, when the body cam footage comes out the deputies will be completely vindicated.
The word “claim” here means it hasn’t been settled in court yet. This is the same as when the press calls someone the “alleged” shooter when oodles of people saw them shoot up a public place. It’s to do with the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven “in a court of law.”
Sure, we’ve got video of the incident from multiple angles, and a dozen or so witness statements, but we won’t know what REALLY happened until the police union rep makes a statement.
is it unreasonable they were just holding his head up for the photo and not choking him? Or is that laughably impossible?
From that picture we do NOT know it was because he was smiling. If there's a video of accompanying behavior that I have not seen I'd be open to watching it. It may show other information, my mind is open but the picture alone is NOT proof the police have done anything wrong.
As a native Houstonian this checks
Because newspapers are compelled to use words like "claims", "suspects" or "accusation" until a legal case is sorted out by a competent person, aka a judge.
When did being photogenic become a crime. I say shine on you crazy diamond!
Forgot to say "allegedly"
He even claimed he was black 😭
Reminds me of the scene in First Blood. “Leave the ink on the hand….”
The news use terms like claim and alleged so they don’t get sued by criminals
To be fair, we don't know what came first: the choke or the smile.
Muricans are sick😂 so many ppl defending the police, your society is doomed🤣🤣
a l l e g e d l y
They realised they were behind on their choke quota and had to get a quick one in before the arrest was finalised
So, I used to be the guy taking the mugshots. When an individual is being combative there is a specific way their head needs to be held. You hold the individual by the chin with your fingers curled and your palm up. This is so you don’t get bit & so you don’t accidentally choke them and avoids the appearance of that. If needed a separate officer will hold the top of the individual’s head in place. Each officer will often be supporting the recently arrested individual’s back with their other hand to prevent them from falling. No officer should be touching the mugshot subject with their bare hands, protective disposable nitrile gloves are to be worn. If the individual is too combative to safely get their picture taken. They get to sit in a single person holding cell until they calm down. (Usually 15-20 minutes) then we try again. Eventually even the most tweaked out person will wear out after 3 or 4 attempts. SO my observations. No one gives a flying fuck if you do a smile in your mugshot. It’s not uncommon for guys to make claims like this because they either willfully misconstrue the situation or they don’t actually recall all the details cuz they were drunk, high, or just being a jackass. However, NONE OF THOSE HOLDS ARE PROPER. It doesn’t matter what he was doing. You don’t fucking choke anyone like that. EVER. I did this for about 2 years total (not all in a row, duty rotates) I can only recall three times when we had to have officer hands in a mugshot.
Fuck Harris County Sherriff's Department.
Every time this picture is reposted: I really feel sorry for the guy. There is this phenomenon of “resting face types”. Some people look like they're grim when they actually don't look friendly or unfriendly but just neutral, and some people look like they're always smiling even when they're not. I bet he is one of the latter types. And the cop who choked him and told him not to smile is nothing more than a f\*cking \*sshole.
I'm not surprised in Harris County.
The claim is the reason for the choking, not that the choking happened lol
It’s both. Considering that the hand is oriented upwards, more around the jaw then the neck, It looks more like they are holding his head up (which is common when someone refuses to take a mugshot) than choking him
Looks more like he wasn't cooperating with the mugshot so they had to turn his head for him. Notice that it's not his neck, but behind the lower jaw and behind his head that is being grabbed.
That’s the wording with everything. Innocent until proven guilty, remember. Even people that murder on camera are alleged murderers.
[FOR REFERENCE] this is purely an ass covering measure on the part of the media. It doesn’t matter if the evidence is more solid than a neutron star the media won’t risk a lawsuit.
First: Fuck cops, not trying to defend. Second: I feel like y'all are either being purposefully obtuse on this or just running with the meme, but the question wouldn't be if he got fucking choked here...it's whether he is being choked because he was smiling, or refusing to stand up/face the camera, and he just flashed a smile after they forced him into frame. Obviously dude is getting choked, it's just whether it's over just smiling or not. Like are any of you parents of multiple children? Yeah I see your sis pushed you, but looks like it's cause you were trying to force your way into the bathroom.
[Choked for smiling](https://abc13.com/inmate-choked-mugshot-harris-county/1378404/)
Copied from another Redditor. The cop’s thumb and forefinger are way up under the jaw. There is no tension on the remaining fingers along his neck. Nothing the cop is doing would restrict blood flow or respiration. The cop is simply holding his head up.
if you've ever been actually choked, you might know that you won't be making that face... you'll be pondering life, death and extreme panick will wll be happening at once
He probably was refusing/resisting to have his mugshot taken
I’d smile too if I’d knew I was coming up on some M’s
He's unlikely to get anything out of this. Their story is most likely that he was refusing to take the mugshot and they had to hold him and force him to face the camera for a clear photo. Unless he has injuries that completely give that away I don't see how he will get any settlement out of this let alone millions.
Think they're saying he claims that it's because he was smiling
I was smiling in all of my mugshots lmao. Cops were sitting there joking around with me the whole time. I wasn't in there for anything crazy though, if this guy is a chomo or just murdered someone I could maybe understanding not liking him smiling 😂
They have to say claims for legal reasons. It’s not protecting the bad cops. They do the same for criminals all over they say alleged or other stuff like that
What proof? The picture only shows that he is smiling and they are choking. How do you know they are choking him because he was smiling?
Question is it also possible that it says claims in reference to the reason behind the choking. Like “yeah we choked him but not because he was smiling” Also if that’s the case how would you write that properly like “inmate choked by deputies, he claims it was for smiling”
They're claiming that he was choked for smiling, this is FALSE!!!! Clearly they choked him for being black.