# Violent police arrest video released



## Eye In The Sky (22 Feb 2013)

Article Link

Violent police arrest video released
4 Trois-Rivières, Que., police officers suspended with pay

Surveillance video showing the forceful arrest of a man suspected of robbing a pharmacy in Trois-Rivières, Que., has been released.

The footage shows 19-year-old Alexis Vadeboncoeur lying face down in the snow, with his arms outstretched as four Trois-Rivières municipal police officers approach.

It shows him being kicked and punched by the officers as he lies on the ground, surrendering.

Vadeboncoeur reportedly has facial injuries and a broken tooth.

In their police report, offices said the teen had broken into a business. They reported they had to use force because their lives were in danger.

Quebec provincial police Sgt. Gregory Gomez del Prado said the force's internal affairs division is investigating.

The four police officers have been suspended with pay.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I know, I know...we weren't there, etc but that video looked fuckin' brutal.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Feb 2013)

krimynal said:
			
		

> that's the problem with a lot of cops down here in Quebec .... They are all really brave when they are 4-5 against 1 .... but 1 on 1 they run and hide in they re cars ...... pretty stupid if you ask me .... especially in trois-riviere where nothing happens ....



Quit talking smak. Everyone is now stupider for reading your comment.


----------



## J.J (22 Feb 2013)

From what was seen in the video, it was wrong, it was excessive and unprofessional.

In my opinion (I know a little about LEO use of force), they should not have conducted themselves in that manner. Officers like that are why the legitimate situations are put under a microscope and garner comments from those like krimynal.


----------



## Container (22 Feb 2013)

I dont anticipate them being able to defend that. 

Generally speaking from whats being said- robbery, lives in danger etc they would have been expected to go with a high risk take down with separation- which looks nothing like what happens here. It looks icy. There may be other things going on- but from the video alone....we'd have to be missing something significant.

Such as a second weapon or something that came into play once they started to try and arrest him. Then again you cant do things improperly and then use heavy control and expect the court to back you. Buddy Tavares in BC is a recent example where the officer failed to use a proper take down and then tried to use "danger" to justify his actions. Which resulted in a conviction.


----------



## Journeyman (22 Feb 2013)

WR said:
			
		

> ....and garner comments from those like krimynal.


Which have since been deleted -- by him or a Mod, I don't know.


----------



## krimynal (22 Feb 2013)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Which have since been deleted -- by him or a Mod, I don't know.



I modified it myself , then it got deleted ... anyways I just dint think it was appropriate .... must have been something we didn't see but from what we can see ... the guy was down and waiting ....


maybe they arrested him hundred feet from there and he resisted and punched an officer .... maybe ...... but judging by this video .... it was pretty obvious that he was lying there waiting


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Feb 2013)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Which have since been deleted -- by him or a Mod, I don't know.



.......but quoted in my post.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Feb 2013)

krimynal said:
			
		

> maybe they arrested him hundred feet from there and he resisted and punched an officer .... maybe ...... but judging by this video .... it was pretty obvious that he was lying there waiting



Irregardless of what he did previously and how much we might think he deserved a kick in the face (I think a lot of people do) he doesn't appear to be posing a threat and under our government laws and ethics it looks like what the police did was wrong and criminal.

After seeing just that video I'd think twice before surrendering to those cops.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Feb 2013)

krimynal said:
			
		

> I modified it myself , then it got deleted ... anyways I just dint think it was appropriate .... must have been something we didn't see but from what we can see ... the guy was down and waiting ....
> 
> 
> maybe they arrested him hundred feet from there and he resisted and punched an officer .... maybe ...... but judging by this video .... it was pretty obvious that he was lying there waiting



It wasn't your comments about what may have happened or conjecture of the lead-up or causation.

It was the dumb comment suggesting cops are cowardly and travel in packs for safety.

Enough said. Learn and move on.


----------



## 57Chevy (22 Feb 2013)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> suspected of robbing a pharmacy in Trois-Rivières




Alexis Vadeboncoeur is charged with armed robbery.

He is accused of entering a Trois-Rivières pharmacy on Feb. 2 wearing a mask and armed with a handgun.

He led police on a brief chase before being cornered in a parking lot.

Video images were captured by a surveillance camera for a post-secondary institution.

Quebec Public Security Minister Stephane Bergeron told Radio-Canada on Friday that violence is unacceptable in Quebec.

 Link to that  is shared with provisions of The Copyright Act

Just to put my 2cents in here.
Should this go into dumb crimminals thread ?
or does he have a very crafty crimminal mind ?
Did he anticipate an action plan in case of a foiled robbery attempt ?

The facts remain.
He led police on a brief chase
He then laid down in perfect alignment and centered with the video camera like he knew of the exact position to take.
How long was he lying there before police arrived ?
(perhaps the earlier portion of the video will reveal and offer a better understanding of what was really going on.
Did he look into the camera ?

Sure, there's a lot of 'uncalled for' violence by police officers.
Was he already known by police ?
and was there any previous altercations with police ?
and if so, did he also anticipate their action ?

Corruption, as far as I know, is always a 'set up'


----------



## 57Chevy (24 Feb 2013)

A couple more observations from the video.

Note that the camera is already "zoomed in" to the appropriate spot and then zooms out at the +- 29sec mark to its normal security setting.
I would certainly like to have a security system that has a mind of its own. Which leads me to believe that he had an accomplice.

From what I have seen here, there may be proof enough for entrapment. (But that's my opinion)
The police though, should have been more professional in their actions.
A friend of mine tells me that while the criminal was running away, the police should have fired a warning shot in the air,
and if he failed to respond appropriately, shoot him in the leg. 
My friend worked many years in a maximum security penitentiary, and would not have hesitated to use his weapon.

I'll be watching to see how this pans out.


----------



## brihard (24 Feb 2013)

57Chevy said:
			
		

> A friend of mine tells me that while the criminal was running away, the police should have fired a warning shot in the air,
> and if he failed to respond appropriately, shoot him in the leg.
> My friend worked many years in a maximum security penitentiary, and would not have hesitated to use his weapon.



Your friend is a bloody fool, and it disturbs me that with that attitude he was ever trusted with a weapon. I can't exaggerately how mind numbingly stupid that opinion is.

A bullet fired in the air will come down somewhere. Falling bullets can kill. This would be a police officer using lethal force in an indiscriminate manner.

A bullet is fired to stop a threat that justifies escalation to deadly force. A fleeing criminal suspect does not satisfy that criteria. A bullet cannot be guaranteed to achieve a merely disabling wound. There are arteries in the legs. To shoot a running suspect while moving yourself is very difficult shooting. The likelihood of missing outright is high. A bullet keeps going until something stops it, and that miss could instead hit an innocent bystander.

I can see absolutely nothing in this video justifying that crapkicking he got. He was on the ground and has surrendered. The law and professionalism dictate securing the suspect, rendering that suspect safe for officers (search incidental to arrest), and bringing them in. In my layman's opinion, what that looks like is assault.


----------



## garb811 (24 Feb 2013)

I've been trying to avoid this thread but...

If you fire your weapon, it is center of mass.  No warning shot, no aiming for a leg...stuff like that gets innocent bystanders killed, like Brihard said.

Ref the video itself, based on what I can see given the angle and quality of the video:

The suspect deliberately positions himself to be able to watch the police arrive and move in on him.
He keeps the pistol relatively close by his left hand.
Although he is prone with his arms outstretched to start, watch what happens when the first officer gets ready to start cuffing him at the 5-6 second mark.  His left arm moves down towards his hip, as if he may be trying to trap the officer's foot.  
While that is happening, he moves his right hand underneath his chest.  He is doing this to either a) avoid having it secured for handcuffing or b) he is going for something underneath him.

Basic 1 + 1 rule.  If there is 1 weapon, there are 2 weapons.  At that point, as soon as he started actively resisting by moving his hands into the positions that he did, the goal is to subdue him as soon as possible, get control of his hands and get the cuffs on, don't forget, there's a loaded pistol on the ground and the last thing anyone needs is it ending up in his hand.

Was what they did excessive?  Maybe, maybe not, that is what the Use of Force investigation is going to determine.

Ref the security camera, yes, security cameras do have a mind of their own these days.  There are a ton of different programming options and it is entirely possible to set a camera up so that if movement happens within its field of view that it centers on it, zooms in, stays zoomed in for a period of time, then resets to its normal position.


----------



## ballz (24 Feb 2013)

57Chevy said:
			
		

> Just to put my 2cents in here.
> Should this go into dumb crimminals thread ?
> or does he have a very crafty crimminal mind ?
> Did he anticipate an action plan in case of a foiled robbery attempt ?



Are you suggesting his Plan B was to have the police beat the snot out of him on camera? I feel like that would be a very hard thing to plan on happening.


----------



## brihard (24 Feb 2013)

I don't believe the camera 'zoomed in'. There's no zoom out transition in the video; it merely restarts the video form a wider frame. I think the first half of the video was simply 'digitally 'zoomed in' using processing software.

Garb- good insight. I'll review it with those things in mind.


----------



## Pieman (24 Feb 2013)

> The suspect deliberately positions himself to be able to watch the police arrive and move in on him.


There is no information to support that was his intension by the video. 



> Although he is prone with his arms outstretched to start, watch what happens when the first officer gets ready to start cuffing him at the 5-6 second mark.  His left arm moves down towards his hip, as if he may be trying to trap the officer's foot.



I don't see that in the video at all. Prior to being kicked in the face his arms are outstretched and hands stationary. Was there something else going on? I don't know either.

You can speculate this many different ways, from police brutality to super hero actions on behalf of the police. 

There is simply not enough information either way and therefore everything here is subject to personal interpretation.

Speculation is not a worthy science.


----------



## garb811 (24 Feb 2013)

Considering you can't differentiate between a face and a shoulder, I'll treat the rest of your post with appropriate weight.


----------



## ballz (24 Feb 2013)

Face or shoulder, the suspect didn't do a thing until he got kicked. I can see why his right arm would instinctively move towards the area he's about to receive a boot.

He doesn't even move his left arm until the officer has his knee between his shoulder blades (which I'm fine with). I'm not sure where that foot he was apparently trying to trap is supposed to be but I don't see it in the video. I'd say the officer had him pretty solid up to that point, once you start going to town on someone they could instinctively struggle.

Am I the only one wondering why the officer approached him alone when he had a bunch of people with him, instead of one person in front and one to the side? Is that the normal way of doing it, or just a heat of the moment mistake?


----------



## 57Chevy (24 Feb 2013)

Nobody who is running away from police would go into a parking lot that offers no further place to go.

Compare the photo from  this article  
with the parking lot photo below or use google maps street view (1176 rue cinq-mars Trois Rivieres Quebec Canada)
Looks pretty much like a dead end to me.
Also attached is a photo after he was brutally beaten by police.


----------



## Jungle (24 Feb 2013)

57Chevy said:
			
		

> Nobody who is running away from police would go into a parking lot that offers no further place to go.



Considering the signs on either side of the gap in the fence say "exit only", I'm guessing there is another access somewhere...


----------



## 57Chevy (24 Feb 2013)

Here's another shot to clarify.
But you can go to google maps street view and look around.


----------



## ballz (24 Feb 2013)

57Chevy said:
			
		

> Nobody who is running away from police would go into a parking lot that offers no further place to go.



Unless there was no planning involved whatsoever...

Unless I am misunderstanding your idea, it's a bit crazy... How on earth could he have planned to trick the police into using unnecessary force? And whether or not the police used excessive force in the arrest, he's still going to end up convicted of the robbery (if he actually did commit it of course, presumption of innocence and all), so this "plan b" would be a really shitty "plan b" since it doesn't get him off at all.


----------



## Pieman (24 Feb 2013)

> Considering you can't differentiate between a face and a shoulder, I'll treat the rest of your post with appropriate weight.



Face/Shoulder/Kneck. Given the angle of the camera I can't see what his foot came into contact with. Do you have magical powers we should be aware of that allow you to know these things? No. So, I suggest you try to look at things more objectively. Also, please read my post again as you have clearly missed the point of it.



> Unless I am misunderstanding your idea, it's a bit crazy... How on earth could he have planned to trick the police into using unnecessary force?



I'm not understanding the idea either. Running to a spot where he knew there were cameras? Maybe...? Seems a very far fetched theory with the only evidence to support it was the presence of cameras....which are just about everywhere these days. Again, all speculation which is going to give no real answers.


----------



## Container (25 Feb 2013)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Your friend is a bloody fool, and it disturbs me that with that attitude he was ever trusted with a weapon. I can't exaggerately how mind numbingly stupid that opinion is.



Warning shots are part of Corrections Canada use of Force. There are police services in Canada that have warning shots in policy. Its been a headache to more than one investigation where a judge references them. They are not good practice however- but they have a place in a correctional setting though- as do "bounce shots". That said warning shots dont go into the air.



			
				garb811 said:
			
		

> Basic 1 + 1 rule.  If there is 1 weapon, there are 2 weapons.  At that point, as soon as he started actively resisting by moving his hands into the positions that he did, the goal is to subdue him as soon as possible, get control of his hands and get the cuffs on, don't forget, there's a loaded pistol on the ground and the last thing anyone needs is it ending up in his hand.



Ill mention Buddy Tavares and Geoff Mantler because that case again speaks directly to what youre saying.

The police officer was accused of excessive force because he kicked Buddy in the face while trying to arrest him. The officer at the time believed the suspect to be armed with a shotgun. The court, and the use of force expert, rejected the "1 plus 1" and immediate danger defence because the officer did not do a proper high risk take down. Neither do these officers. 

Who knows what kind of dialogue took place before and during the arrest. So there may be something we are missing- but if they wanted to use danger and fear for their lives they would have had to go about their business differently. No force in Canada Im aware of teaches anything remotely similar to whats in the video- but sometimes crap happens.

That said- offenders have been getting arrested where they know there are cameras for years. It gets them lighter sentences when they feign resistance and then plead police brutality. Its a common court game.


----------



## larry Strong (10 May 2013)

Police officers charged in violent arrest caught on video


According toan article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from CBC News



> Four police officers caught on video kicking and punching a robbery suspect who appeared to be surrendering are now facing criminal charges.
> 
> The officers, from Trois-Rivières, Que. were suspended with pay after the video of the arrest was made public.
> 
> ...




Larry


----------

