Officer Gets Fired After Suspect Hit by Patrol Car (VIDEO)

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Law and Crime


by Alberto Luperon | 1:40 pm, June 3rd, 2018

A Georgia cop finds himself out of a job this weekend. On Friday, Police Officer Taylor Saulters hit Timmy Shaymar Patmon with a car. On Saturday, he was fired. The termination happened after Chief Scott Freeman reviewed the body cam footage and other evidence, according to a statement published by the Athens-Clarke County Police Department. The officer was fired for violation of policy, and excessive use of force, Public Information Officer Epifanio Rodriguez told Law&Crime in an email.

You can see Saulters’ body-cam footage above. According to the ACCPD, he was part of a chase around 7:30 p.m. on Friday. Another officer, Hunter Blackmon, saw suspect Timmy Patmon, who police said faced a felony probation warrant.

Cops worked to verify if the warrant was valid and tried to make contact with Patmon, but he ran, police said. Blackmon chased on foot. You may have gathered by now that Saulters pursued in his patrol car.

According to police, the officer tried to block Patmon’s path with the vehicle twice. The first time resulted in Saulters striking a curb, and flattening the driver’s side front tire, cops said. Here’s how the statement described the second attempt:

Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/officer-gets-fired-after-suspect-hit-by-patrol-car-video/

[Judi Lynn]

1. Georgia cop fired after hitting suspect fleeing on foot with his patrol car

By Robert Gearty

Published June 03, 2018
FoxNews.com
A rookie Georgia police officer has been fired after striking a suspect fleeing on foot with his patrol car, officails said.

Athens-Clarke County Police Department released bodycam footage of Officer Taylor Saulters striking Timmy Patmon, 23, during a chase Friday in east Athens.

“After reviewing the officers’ body camera footage, and all the other facts and circumstances of this case, Chief Scott Freeman terminated the employment of Officer Taylor Saulters,” the department said in a Facebook post Saturday.

Patmon suffered scrapes and bruises, police said.



More:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/06/03/georgia-cop-fired-after-hitting-suspect-fleeing-on-foot-with-his-patrol-car.print.html

[Stuart G]

2. The boss fired the damn cop..right away...

Last edited Sun Jun 3, 2018, 03:02 PM - Edit history (4)

The body cam really fired the cop. Just as important the chief saw what the body cam saw, and fired this person the very next day. It really is obvious if you look at the recording...

And the cop lied when he talked about it at the scene..Hit the link and you can read the cop's the lie.

Body cams have changed this entire profession for the better in the last 5 years.....according to one article..It is relatively recent that body cams were introduced...............................from Wikepedia

"The first generation of 'modern' police body cameras was introduced around 2005 in the United Kingdom

In the U.S. the first time a city required them was in 2014...Realto California...population of 95,000... Therefore the required use of body cams is relatively new in the United States. Each police force and city decides for itself on the use of body cams.

[Iggo]

3. Cops. That's who they are. That's what they do.

Ubiquitous video recording exposes what has always gone on.

[Jedi Guy]

7. No, that isn't who cops are or what they do.

Hyperbole serves no useful purpose.

[Iggo]

22. They prove it every day.

[Jedi Guy]

24. Do they indeed?

What about the hundreds, or thousands, who help and serve people every day? The good far outweighs the bad. Every time a cop is caught doing something wrong, all we hear is the same thing you posted. The ones who do the right thing are ignored.

[Iggo]

25. The crimes they commit are not outweighed by their doing the job we hired them to do.

[Jedi Guy]

28. Okay, if you say so.

Carry on with that irrational and prejudicial thinking. I'll be over here in the real world hanging out with logic and common sense.

[True Dough]

26. I agree that the majority of police officers are good people

I don't know if it's 60% or 85% of them, but I think it's better than half.

However, for far too long, too many of the good ones remained silent while watching all sorts of injustices being committed by the bad seeds. It is the dawn of the age of the cellphone and surveillance video and body cams (when they conveniently work) that has resulted in real consequences for the ones who absolutely do not deserve to be in uniform. Even now, some are still "beating" charges when the evidence against them is clear cut.

Progress is occurring, but it's gradual.

[Jedi Guy]

27. I agree they're not perfect.

I also agree that we're reaching a point where the actions of the bad seeds can no longer be swept under the rug. Hopefully things will continue to improve, with officers who are caught in wrongdoing are punished for their crimes.

However, far too many progressives, such as Iggo, write off all cops, in defiance of logic and simple common sense. This runs squarely counter to the self-congratulatory "progressives are rational, conservatives are emotional" back-patting that goes on all the time.

At bottom, it's a lazy and prejudicial thought process, assuming that all members of the group are represented by the worst examples of that group. We call out that irrational thinking among our opponents, and then turn around and fall right into the same trap. It's ridiculous.

[DiverDave]

29. How about the thousands

That see something and say nothing?
Yeah, good cops

[Jedi Guy]

30. Okay.

Go ahead and believe all cops are corrupt, if that's what makes you feel validated. Have fun with it.

[Judi Lynn]

4. Police officer fired for intentionally hitting suspect with car

"You didn't have to hit that man like that" a witness can be heard yelling during the incident
LUKE BARNES
JUN 3, 2018, 2:03 PM




A police officer in Georgia has been fired after purposefully ramming his cruiser into a fleeing suspect.

Taylor Saulters, an officer with Athens-Clarke County Police Department, was pursuing a suspect Friday in his patrol car. After initially trying to block the man, who was identified as Timmy Patmon, Saulters used his car to ram Patmon and send him flying across the hood of his cruiser.

The encounter immediately infuriated witnesses who watched the scene unfold.

“You didn’t have hit that man like that,” one woman can be heard saying in the background as Saulters and his partner arrest Patmon, who was wanted on a felony probation warrant and who looked extremely dazed from being struck.

More:
https://thinkprogress.org/police-officer-fired-for-intentionally-hitting-suspect-with-car-c71f2fe7a948/

[3Hotdogs]

5. "I got him with my car. That's what they are yelling about." Salters, explaining why he needs backup

for crowd control and why the people in the background are yelling,

[Stuart G]

6. An opinion why the cop was fired so quickly ..

The body cam showed enough proof to the chief of police that the cop was at fault in this case. It might have been questionable at some point as to what needed to be done, but the chief of police decided after viewing the footage that we can all see, that the cop probably did the wrong thing by hitting the suspect with his car...

Why so quickly? Why not an investigation? Why not waiting awhile for ...all the facts and opinions to be heard and evaluated...etc..etc..etc..

The chief of police saw enough that the action was clearly questionable by the cop...Firing the cop immediately without all the ......investigation and time ...prevented.. protests and gatherings to complain about inaction and lack of concern for the person hit by the car..The cop in many cases like this, gets off free or only sometimes is reprimanded. Long wait while investigations take place...etc.. In this case, he was fired immediately!!!And could be charged at some later date..

The chief of police quickly fired the cop. ... The community over all, is much safer without the cop than with the cop..

[gyroscope]

8. Seems overblown to me

the cop used the car at low speed to block the fleeing suspect. the cop didn't ram or try to run him over. the suspect was not significantly injured.

a reprimand might have been in order if it was against policy to use the vehicle like that, but I don't think the cop should have been fired. I hope the cop has a union and/or files an appeal.

[Judi Lynn]

10. Thanks for the diagnosis, doctor. It's amazing how you could tell a dazed man was unscathed,

after being knocked down against the asphalt road.

You are repeating what the cop, trying to cover his @$$ so he would not be terminated, used for his official story.

It is also amazing how off base the police standing around acting very nervous were, considering there was nothing wrong with what the police man did. How did they not realize it was no big deal?

Thanks for your enlightened reading of the situation, and your faith in the integrity of the cop who flattened that guy, then threatened to taze him after that.

[Igel]

14. I have to assume there's other probative material we didn't see.

Because based on the video, it's clearly impossible to tell what happened if it's a question of saying the man wasn't seriously hurt and the cop might not have been wrong.

Oddly, based on the same video, it's clearly required to tell what happened if it's a question of saying how the man was hurt and how horribly wrong the cop was.

It's the same data. It's probative or not, or we let our interpretative intent guide our viewing.

Or there's information that we haven't seen that made the conclusion by the police chief the clearly correct one.

[gyroscope]

16. If an officer uses reasonable force to stop a feeling suspect

but the suspect is still injured in the process of being apprehended, that is not the fault of the officer. it is the fault of the suspect for fleeing. cooperate and you you won't get hurt.

and I don't say that lightly, because 9 out of 10 police brutality cases are the fault of the officers IMO.

[blkyank1]

17. The guy used his car twice ....

To block a fleeing suspect and was involved in what would be one traffic collision (Vehicle vs curb) and what could be
a second traffic collision (vehicle vs pedestrian) if he hit the suspect by accident or a use of deadly force if he hit the
guy on purpose.

It all comes down to Department policy. My Department in southern California allows an officer to follow a fleeing suspect
with your vehicle to maintain visual contact and direct other units to set up a perimeter to contain the suspect in a given
area if you are by yourself.

But the general practice is that since one officer was already pursuing the suspect on foot, the other officer should have also
been on foot a little behind the first one, directing other units. The reason for this practice is so ...................

A. The officer in the vehicle loses visual contact with the running officer and suspect who turns to face his pursuer and
a gunfight breaks out you can't help your partner with.

B. The pursuing officer catches the suspect out the visual range of the guy in the car and a use of force happens where the suspect
overpowers (and possibly kills with a taken gun) the pursuing officer because he/she had no backup.

C. The pursuing officer catches the suspect,starts to lose a fight and has to escalate to deadly force and shoot the suspect
when a second officer present may have been enough to take the suspect into custody.

That Department may have reviewed the video and determined it was not an accident but a deliberate attempt to
PIT maneuver a fleeing suspect on foot which is considered a use of deadly force that the officer would have to
articulate why the suspect posed a life and death threat at that moment and why he had to use the option of
his vehicle to stop him.

Due to the fact, the officer collided with the curb and the suspect, the Department may have concluded he
either was trying to ram the suspect in both instances or he failed to operate his vehicle in a safe manner
in both instances, resulting in damaged city property and an injured suspect.

The PIT maneuver can only be used on fleeing vehicles with supervisor approval and backup units at scene.

The officer said he was trying to block the suspect with his vehicle both times which means a deliberate act
and both times he crashed his vehicle (once into the curb and once into the suspect) The chief could have concluded
that the officer was using a level of force that wasn't warranted by the situation, that caused damage to the department
property (the patrol car) and a suspect who is going to sue over the policy violations and receive a huge award
from the city (if they don't just offer an immediate settlement and drop the existing charges to sweeten the deal)

Had the guy been on a big city Department, he would have been repped by a union. But even in California which
is unionized, the Sheriff/Police Chiefs can immediately fire an officer if the alleged violation is so blatantly criminal
and shocks the public. That's pretty rare and the Department could make a fired officer a millionaire for unlawful
termination if they get the case wrong, so they only do it in the most extream situations.

[JCanete]

19. That is a strange interpretation for using a vehicle to bring a suspect to the ground. Are you

saying he didn't try to hit him, because he was certainly playing fast and lose with that citizen's life to be driving so close to him and to attempt to cut in like that. You can't exactly control for the force and consequences that taking down a suspect with a car will have on that person, how they will fall, from the impact, etc. Clearly you can't control for whether or not you will even hit the person(being very generous and assuming that wasn't the intent).

Firing was in order.

[kaotikross]

9. Okay..

I dont think the cop hurt the guy much although they shouldn't be using the car as a weapon at all- but my REAL problem is with "Officer Lazy-Ass" DRIVING that car on a flat tire for another mile or more. That's dangerous and costly to taxpayers in the form of road repairs and a new rim after he messed that up. HE hit the curb, HE should get out and be a man and change the damn tire!

[Judi Lynn]

11. You sound a little like the driver, worrying about the money to things involved

but placing little value on the damage to, the disrespect for the life of that young man.

Does a cop doing something dead wrong have to mangle him obscenely, or tear him to pieces, or kill him instantly get a pass even though anyone sentient understands you do NOT run into a living being with a car?

"Driving on a flat tire." That's amazing.

[brer cat]

12. The last couple of posts were quite enlightening.

smh

[blkyank1]

18. You can ......

"Run into a living being with a (police) car" If the situation calls for it. Its called deadly force and the standard would have
to be the same one you would use a gun in.

This cop was pursuing a guy fleeing a warrant arrest who wasn't posing an immediate threat to that officer, the other officer pursuing
on foot or the public.

Now if the warrant had the suspect as a Charlie Manson or a Bin Laden type with a record of murder and a strong
likelihood of committing further murders if he escaped, that guy could be stopped with deadly force, but the officer
has to know that while chasing him, not find out later.

[blkyank1]

20. Well there...

Was a foot pursuit going on. So changing the tire isn't really an option with a brother officer out there.
Just get out of the car and use your handheld radio to direct other officers to the scene while keeping visual
contact with the other officer and help him if he catches the suspect.

[Iggo]

23. Oh my god, that poor car! Thoughts and prayers.

[RockRaven]

13. When a cop acts outside of or against policy, their actions should be treated like any other person

apart from being fired or disciplined, their action also should be treated as if they were a civilian and performed that action in front of LEOs.

What would the police in my town do to me if they saw me doing that to a guy in my neighborhood? Arrest me? Charge me with assault? Reckless endangerment? Assault with a deadly weapon? Menacing? Or give me a pat on the back and an atta boy (I sure hope not)? I really don't know what they'd do.

[Ptah]

15. Officer who drove into suspect justified, chief says (April 15, 2015)

(CNN)An Arizona police chief on Wednesday supported an officer's decision to drive his car into an armed suspect, saying that although the move could have killed the suspect, deadly force was justified.

Video of the incident, recorded February 19 by the dashboard cameras of two Marana police cars, shows one of the cars running into a suspect with who had a rifle in the city about a half hour from Tucson.

The suspect, 36-year-old Mario Valencia, survived and was hospitalized before being criminally charged. Marana police Chief Terry Rozema was asked Wednesday on CNN's "New Day" whether police were fortunate that Valencia didn't die.

"That very well may be ... that it's luck that he is still alive. The fact of the matter remains, though, deadly force was authorized," Rozema said.


https://www.cnn.com/2015/04/15/us/arizona-police-run-over-suspect/index.html

[Jake Stern]

21. Other than the use of a car this case is in no way similar

The cops in the Arizona case did what they had to do to take down an armed suspect who had robbed a c-store that morning, stolen a .30-.30 w/ammo and had fired said rifle in public.

The suspect in Georgia was wanted on a felony probation warrant and posed no imminent risk to the public.

While the prevailing mindset here at DU seems to be that any action by a cop to stop someone is automatically deemed excessive force, this is one case where I totally support the police in hitting the guy to take out an armed suspect that has clearly shown he is dangerous.