HOUSTON — A surveillance video that appears to show four former city police officers kicking and stomping a black teenage burglary suspect last year has been made public by a community activist.

Houston Mayor Annise Parker and prosecutors on Thursday criticized the release of that tape, saying it could jeopardize the cases against the officers.

But leaders in Houston's black community applauded the release of what they called the "appalling" and "outrageous" actions of "rogue officers."

"This never, ever should have been kept from the people," said Quanell X, the community activist who released the video to Houston television station KTRK, which aired it Wednesday evening.


"What's on that tape, the world will get a chance to see now how they truly behave in public with young black men," he added.

Quanell X released the video despite a court order by a federal judge in October that had barred its release before the officers' trials.

The order was related to a federal lawsuit the teenager, Chad Holley, has filed in which he alleges that his civil rights were violated during his arrest. A court order in the criminal cases involving the indicted officers had also barred the video's release before trial.

A copy of the video was shown to the media on a laptop at a news conference Thursday attended by Quanell X and other black community leaders. He declined to provide copies of it to reporters.

Handcuffed
The footage appears to show the officers kicking, punching and stomping on the then 15-year-old Holley during his arrest last March at a self-storage business in southwest Houston.

In the video, Holley is on the ground and is surrounded by at least five officers. He appears to be kicked in the head, abdomen and legs by the officers, even after he has been placed in handcuffs.

Police said the teen was arrested following a brief chase after he and three others had allegedly burglarized a home.

The teenager's mother has said her son's nose was fractured, and he had multiple bruises and limped after the alleged beating.

The four officers were fired and are set to be tried on various charges.

Holley, now 16, was convicted in October in juvenile court of burglary and put on probation.

Pastor James Nash, with Houston Ministers Against Crime, said he does not condone Holley's behavior and he was correctly punished in court.

"The courtroom is where justice should have been served, not on the street or the sidewalk," he said.

'Shocked and disgusted'
The Harris County District Attorney's office, the Houston Police Department and Parker all had opposed the release of the video before the officers' trial in August.

Parker said in a statement Thursday that while she remains "shocked and disgusted" by what she saw on the tape, the city has supported the district attorney's desire to keep the video from being released before the trial.

"We did not want to do anything that could jeopardize the prosecution of the police officers involved," she said.

The district attorney's office said in a statement that it would "continue to do everything possible to ensure that both the state and the defense are given a fair trial."

But Dick DeGuerin, the attorney for Andrew Blomberg, one of the four indicted officers, said he is concerned the video's release will make it harder for his client to get a fair trial.

DeGuerin said Blomberg never beat or hit the teenager but only moved his arm so he could be handcuffed.

"The plain fact is the video is ugly," DeGuerin said. "The tendency is to think that they are all guilty of something, lump them all in the same category. Each one of their actions stands alone."

Restraining order
DeGuerin said he had obtained a temporary restraining order to block Quanell X from releasing the video but that it was ignored.

Quanell X said he obtained the video legally and was not forbidden from showing it.

Houston Police Chief Charles McClelland Jr. said in a statement that he already had taken disciplinary action against the officers and wouldn't comment further "until the last case is adjudicated and or appealed."

Blomberg, 28, along with former officers Phillip Bryan, 45; Raad Hassan, 40; and Drew Ryser, 30, each were charged with official oppression. Hassan and Bryan also were charged with violation of the civil rights of a prisoner. If convicted, each officer faces up to a year in jail and a $4,000 fine.

Three others, one sergeant and two officers, were also fired. The sergeant chose to retire and the two others had their firings overturned in arbitration. The city is appealing those decisions.

"They have not regained their jobs. We are doing everything we can to get them to stay fired," said Houston police spokesman Victor Senties.

Story and Video here;

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41421119/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts

That is a shame to hear. Perhaps the young man wont steal again and perhaps those grown men wont abuse their positions when they once again find some.

I think it should a requirement that anytime cops get out of line and its on tape it be released to the public immediately. We give these people weapons and the authority to use lethal force if they feel they are in danger (use of discretion) and people need to know who the police departments are hiring so the public can go raise hell with the city council and chief/sheriff.

the problem in this media age is the concept of 'fair' trial

I think release of too much info to the public before a trial sets the argument against finding jurors who arent already tainted ,,,,

If your on video committing a crime there shouldn't be a trial.

videos dont always tell the whole story, they are sometimes only snippets and other times they can be edited

I'm not saying their reaction is justified, but to be realistic and fair, cops are only human. When you take your chances and flee from them, it's a natural tendency for them to enter into a state of high stress and anxiety.
After all, they're charged with potentially entering into harm's way by chasing and apprehending suspects who they don't know from Adam. They don't know that the subject isn't going to turn and fire on them, take hostages, commit a desperate car jacking or what...
During and after a chase, their adrenalin levels go off the charts and I'd dare anyone to always maintain their composure in a life threatening situation like that...
It's easy to judge them as criminal by witnessing the end result of the chase, but I doubt that many who would dismiss their behavior so assuredly actually put themselves in the cop's shoes while the chase and all of its potential for disaster are occurring.

Again, I'm not saying it's right, but anyone who's ever been in a combat type situation understands the tunnel vision you experience while coping with a deadly serious threat, and a chase IS a threat. It's a threat to potentially any innocent bystander, as well as the officers involved in the chase.

jmo

...the way i see it they are clearly in violation of the "use of force".. jmo

Yes, clearly... Two wrongs don't make a right. The suspect stole and ran. The police caught him and beat him. The suspect's alleged motivation was to steal and get away with it. The cop's motivation was to catch an unknown perpetrator and in the heat of their pumped-up-adrenalin-filled state of mind, punish him for putting them them at risk.

Both parties were wrong, but I have sympathy for the cops because they don't set out to do wrong, it's a crime of passion. I'd bet that had they even had two minutes to cool down, it wouldn't have happened.
True that they are held to a higher standard, and professionalism dictates that they push their own emotions aside, yet I don't know anyone who doesn't get angry at being made to feel fear.

Cops are human too, is all I'm saying.

Quanell X? Yea, he's a credible individual............

But yet other times they tell the whole story, are full length, and unedited!

There's a damn good reason they (the police in the field) are called "The thin blue line".

My opinion is that since they take on the responsibility of enforcing the law, then yes, it goes without saying that they, themselves, should be above reproach in that regard.

That being said, I also feel that the full gravity of their responsibilities and duties should be taken into full account when judging their behavior in the course of their duties.

We in America are supposedly guaranteed through the constitution a "jury of our peers". I'm not sure that every tom, dick, and harry, alice, brenda and mary who's quite adept at internet surfing and televion viewing but has never put not only their life, but also the future welfare of their families on the line for "civic" duty is qualified to judge them.

At least I don't feel that I'm qualified to do such... When I'm at work, I don't risk being in pursuit of someone or multiple someones who could do anything to get away and only God knows what, should they accomplish that get away. If you're a cop in pursuit, you don't know WHO you're chasing. For all you'd know, it could be a serial killer or even Osama Bin Laudin (sic?).

They'll probably stay fired and be ostracized for what they've done. Shame really... Not for what they did wrong, but for all the times before then when they may have contributed in very positive ways.

"When we do good, nobody remembers. When we do bad, no one forgets".

Although he'll likely be traumatized, I hope the young man (victim) in question recovers and goes on to lead a productive life, but I wish he'd decided to follow police orders to surrender that day.

When we do good, nobody remembers. When we do bad, no one forgets".


Im sure criminals feel the same way. There are actions and consequences and Im not sure I can understand the emotional justification for kicking someone that is handcuffed and lying on the ground....obviously the threat(if there was any) is over

I agree that its a shame people are stigmatized their whole life over a bad choice and I too hope these cops go on to be productive citizens and are permitted to try to do so.

I guess it's just easier for me to put myself in the shoes of a cop who just needlessly (had the alleged suspect surrendered) put himself at potential great risk for the public good, than it is for me to put myself in the shoes of a criminal who put all concerned at risk for his own selfish motivations.

Please don't get me wrong. I certainly agree that police brutality is horrendous and they deserve to be prosecuted. Restraint on their part is to be expected and I'm not condoning their actions. It's just that I better understand the mindset of being angry at someone for overtly disobeying a lawful order, thus putting them at great risk, than I do the mindset of someone intent on getting away with a crime and putting others at risk in the process...

when has a teenager running put you at risk? I dont quite get that,,,

anyhow,,'intentions' aside (cops also get PAID, which may be another intention as well as the intoxication of power,,,,public well being is just one POTENTIAL intention a 'cop' might have,,,but nobody knows except that cop)


I also understand the mindset of being angry, I dont understand the MOB mindset though,,which this is more akin too

A one on one encounter may be more deserving of empathy

If I'm an officer in pursuit, I have no clue of exactly WHO I'm chasing, the full extent of their alleged crimes, or what they might resort to, to avoid being caught.

Do they have a weapon? Will they resort to hostage taking? Is there potential for danger to an innocent bystander, either from the actual fleeing suspect or perhaps by a mishap by me in the course of pursuit?

It's known to happen that a desperate fleeing suspect will take a hostage, carjack and perhaps commit a kidnapping, cause an accident, or pull a hidden weapon and open fire.

I hardly think that it can be safe to assume that what looks like just a benign teenager is above any of those contingencies.

That's what makes me think that...

If I'm an officer in pursuit, I have no clue of exactly WHO I'm chasing, the full extent of their alleged crimes, or what they might resort to, to avoid being caught


and you are PAID to deal with all those possibilities,,,if its so stressful for ya that you need to kick and pummel someone AFTER you have contained them, its not the job for you(not you, speaking rhetorically only here) and the only thing that seperates you from a gangster is your badge(who also fear for their safety in SOME instances for sure)

I feel for police who are in the line of danger(which not all of them are), and in LIFE threatening situations where someone is armed, or confrontational, I can understand them feeling FEARFUL

but with someone RUNNING Away from them and when it is not one on one, I still dont get the 'fear' defense

Cops aren't robots just because they're paid. I already stated my agreement that police brutality is criminal.
The fear comes into the picture with A, the suspect may be armed. B, the suspect may resort to some desperate act. C, in the course of pursuit, a mishap with an innocent bystander may occur. D, the outcome is uncertain at best.

I respectfully don't understand why any of that can't be accepted or understood.

I understand ALL of that, I just dont quite BUY it as the logic behind why several GROWN man would kick a teenager handcuffed and lying on the ground(there is no longer the question of whether he is armed or can do something desperate or hurt a bystander and the outcome is pretty certain)

how long a period of time should we excuse their ADRENALINE rush after the suspect is contained?