NYC driver beaten by motorcyclists

[FanTactical]

Curious what you guys think of this debacle. It now seems that an off-duty NYPD officer was at the scene but didn't do anything to help the driver being beaten. Off duty (even undercover), I expect that officer to try to diffuse things.

Not trying to insight anything here, but I drive I-5 btw. LA and SF a lot. Several times my wife and I have been swarmed by various biker gangs (mongrals, hells angels and top hatters). It's a bit unnerving. All it takes is for one idiot in the pack to do something stupid as a joke.

I've played out the scenario in my mind of what I would do if we were forced to pull over - no help for miles. I confess that I would've reacted the same as the victim, and what I imagine happens next is never pretty.

[1CavScout]

Actual outlaw MC's (it's Mongols btw) pose very little threat to the general public IMO (at least as far as incidents like this are concerned). The big clubs (Mongols, HA etc...) are all about business. Doing something like you saw in NY is not good for business. The guys in NY were not part of a "Gang" IMO. Nobody was flying colors from what I saw in the video.

[FanTactical]

Actual outlaw MC's (it's Mongols btw) pose very little threat to the general public IMO (at least as far as incidents like this are concerned).

Sorry, it was late; I meant Mongols. Probably pissed a few of 'em off that are reading this. You may be right about those clubs; I'm certainly no expert. My point was about the scenario of being forced to stop and what one's natural reaction would be in a case like that. I would've reacted the same way.

If, indeed, there had been an officer at the scene that stood by and did nothing, I would want him/her held accountable.

[ptusa]

Mongols...Mongrals...Mongrels.

Potato, Potahto...

[edgerly779]

The off duty nypd detective that was riding in the group did nothing. He retained an attorney and is hiding behind him and his union rep. Hope he is fired and loses his pension for this. He is a disgrace to law enforcement.

[Ron-Solo]

If, indeed, there had been an officer at the scene that stood by and did nothing, I would want him/her held accountable.

The off duty nypd detective that was riding in the group did nothing. He retained an attorney and is hiding behind him and his union rep. Hope he is fired and loses his pension for this. He is a disgrace to law enforcement.

Held accountable for what? Participating in a mass violation of traffic laws? Sure, but you'd better be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he violated some traffic laws.

Held accountable for not stopping an angry mob intent on doing harm? There is no safe tactical solution to stop a mob like that, IF he was even present at the beating. He is not required to embark on a suicide mission when off duty.

[Vin63]

Yeah, it's been adjudicated countless times that law enforcement personnel are not liable, legally responsible or culpable for anyone's safety even while observing a crime being committed or even if the perp is in custody of said law enforcement agency. They have no obligation to prevent a crime or to maintain a citizen's safety. Here are just a few of the more notable examples:

Riss v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579, 293 NYS2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. Ct. of Ap. 1958);
Keane v. City of Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1968);
Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1983); Calogrides v. City of Mobile, 475 So.2d 560 (S.Ct. A;a. 1985);
Morris v. Musser, 478 A.2d 937 (1984);
Davidson v. City of Westminster, 32 C.3d 197, 185 Cal.Rptr. 252, 649 P.2d 894 (S.Ct. Cal. 1982);
Chapman v. City of Philadelphia, 434 A.2d 753 (Sup.Ct. Penn. 1981); Weutrich v. Delia, 155 N.J. Super 324, 326, 382 A.2d 929, 930 (1978);
Sapp v. City of Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla.Ct. of Ap. 1977);
Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E. 2d 871 (Ind.Ct. of Ap.);
Silver v. City of Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (S.Ct. Minn. 1969); and
Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 61 (7th Cir. 1982)

[FanTactical]

I guess we disagree. This goes beyond case law, and I wasn't saying that he should be held legally accountable. It's about being a compassionate human being. IMHO the officer doesn't represent his profession very well. Not sayin' he had to take on an angry mob, but most people in a mob are influenced by one or two instigators. Diverting attention from those instigators can do a lot to calm things down.

Isn't it a LEO tactic to target the instigators in mob situations?

[Vin63]

...This goes beyond case law, and I wasn't saying that he should be held legally accountable...

I hear ya...but, if he is law enforcement officer, he is bound to and operates by the law...getting fired for or being held legally accountable for adhering to the law brings about its own legal consequences...

We'll see how things pan out on the ethical side of things.

[muttonbuster]

Perhaps it varies by department. I've been reading quite a bit on this. On WPIX New York, a former detective stated that according to the NYPD parol guide whether on duty or off duty if you can take police action, you are obligated to do so.

http://pix11.com/2013/10/05/did-undercover-cops-at-the-scene-of-biker-attack-follow-protocol/#axzz2gvcIL9eC

Also, there wasn't just one officer present, there were several.

http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/national_world&id=9275585

My question on this (and was hoping to get a LEO's opinion), is what exactly does off duty mean in regards to an undercover officer? Do they mean he wasn't working a regular beat, but was working undercover at the time? Could be wrong, but I was pretty sure hours aren't set for undercover work. The news stated he was "off the clock". I was thinking if you're investigating this group (that by several accounts has been menacing the city), and went for a ride with them, wouldn't you want to get paid?

[Ron-Solo]

Lots of armchair quarterbacking going on here.

[Daveca]

WHAT!!

Held accountable for what? Participating in a mass violation of traffic laws? Sure, but you'd better be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he violated some traffic laws.

Held accountable for not stopping an angry mob intent on doing harm? There is no safe tactical solution to stop a mob like that, IF he was even present at the beating. He is not required to embark on a suicide mission when off duty.

Since when can a police officer, on or off duty just simply stand by and watch someone get beaten like that. His job, on or off duty is to attempt to stop this type of criminal activity. Even you said they were an "angry mob". As a police office, he has a moral and an ethical responsibility and a professional duty to stop the activity and prevent injury to a victim of an attack. And who ever said his attempt to stop this had to be safe for him? Police deal with risky situations on a continuing basis. Stopping an "angry mob intent on doing harm" is what he took an oath to do. It did not appear to be a "suicide mission" since no weapons were displayed at the time, and maybe the intervention of a police officer with some balls could have caused a de-escalation of the situation. My gosh, If you are a LEO, I'm glad we never had any like you in my Dept. I don't mean to be rude with my comments, but that position is disgusting and is a major reason the public has no faith in some law enforcement today. And, yes, I've been there. Former Texas State Trooper.

[Daveca]

They apparently now have over 200 recorded 911 calls from the public reporting the bikers in this incident, (which are not Mongols, Hell's Angels or any other organized Criminal Enterprise Motorcycle Gang), (RICO Act potential), for cornering several other motorists, harrassing, threatening and intimidating drivers at about the same time, along with numerous videos of them violating traffic laws in the process, which was on the evening news Sat. evening. The latest report, which remains to be verified also said there may have been as many a 5 off duty officers riding with the bikers. I sure hope not. That would truly be another black eye for Law Enforcement at a time whe it is really not needed. I really hope there are still some Officers out there who still feel the way I do.

[Vin63]

Since when can a police officer, on or off duty just simply stand by and watch someone get beaten like that. His job, on or off duty is to attempt to stop this type of criminal activity...

See the list of cases in my post #7, particularly Davidson v. City of Westminster. This is the case I read that is most referred to in these types of instances for law enforcement not getting involved in acts of crime they witness or are present during the commission:

Davidson v. City of Westminster, 32 C.3d 197, 185 Cal.Rptr. 252, 649 P.2d 894 (S.Ct. Cal. 1982): a man stabbed Yolanda Davidson while she was using a laundromat. At the time of the stabbing, police officers had the laundromat under surveillance for the purpose of preventing assaults and apprehending the perpetrator of three stabbings that had occurred there or at nearby laundromats. Thus, the officers knew Davidson was in the laundromat. When the officers saw the man enter and leave the laundromat several times, they believed that he was the likely perpetrator of at least one of the prior assaults. Nevertheless, the officers did not warn Davidson, and she eventually was stabbed inside the laundromat. (Id. at p. 201.) The Supreme Court concluded the officers had no duty to warn or to otherwise protect Davidson.

[FanTactical]

Lots of armchair quarterbacking going on here.

Um, I think that is what a discussion forum is for, at least the discussing part.

I respect your many years of service, which gives you unique insight on things like this. However, I think the public has a different expectation of LEOs. The same holds true for all public servants. I'd hate to see it get to the point where the public regards LE the same as it does its elected officials.

Vin63 - Any more recent cases? Most of those are 20 yrs. old - not that it matters from a precedence standpoint, but I'm curious because time and attitudes have changed a lot in those 20 yrs. Consider how much we've had to fight lately just to keep 2nd amend. rights.