Police response to N.J. mall fight sparks outrage after Black teen cuffed as white teen watches

[Metaphor]

Reports that he was arrested are confusing to you?

I would not say 'confusing', I would say 'not consistent with my understanding of a police arrest'. Thehill article you quoted used the word 'arrested', but it is not clear to me what part of the cops actions were an arrest. Was it cuffing the boy and restraining him? Is that an arrest? Was he actually taken to a station and charged with something or held in a cell?

I found a Guardian article that has the white boy talking about the other boy being 'arrested', but I don't know what he meant when he said 'arrested'. Again, was it the restraint and handcuffs that counted?

This is important because the use of the word 'arrest' implies things other than the described events.

The actions are consistent with racism - you agree with that. I have yet to see any counter argument or evidence. If some arises, I will consider it.

Your explanation is. to say the least, lacking, since only one child was cuffed, Doesn't matter which officer did what.

Of course it matters. The reasons for the disparate treatment matter.

It would be nice to see a rational argument against the racism/bigotry conclusion instead of this insipid defense of white police officers.

I doubt you when you use the word 'nice'. In fact, what I am certain of is that, given the rabid hostility to the notion of even considering other explanations, I think a rational argument would be treated with heavy disdain, accusations of 'defending racists', and accusations of racism against the person making the argument.

 

[Metaphor]

In the context of the fight before the police arrived, what made the black boy the 'victim'?

The police.

Unless you think the law doesn't exist until the police arrive. The police in the context of the fight before they arrived were represented by the law. And the police when they arrived represented the law. According to the law, the black boy was the victim of assault. It's unfortunate that the representatives of the law (once they arrived) also victimized him.

Edit: And now the mall apparently after victimizing him with a ban also wants to steal money from a victim of a crime.

No. You said:

Where does anyone say the "white kid" was detained, arrested, held up, obstructed, hindered, set back, delayed, slowed down by the police other than to stop him from attacking his victim?

You are implying that the black kid was the white boy's "victim" in the fight between them. The video footage I saw does not imply one was a victim over the other. At best, they were both victims of assault. But I do not regard as one boy being a victim over the other. Instead it was escalating tension that reached a fight point.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Where does it say the black kid was arrested?

Where does anyone say the "white kid" was detained, arrested, held up, obstructed, hindered, set back, delayed, slowed down by the police other than to stop him from attacking his victim?

The only story that said 'arrested' was the one linked by laughing dog (which was from thehill, but laughing dog claimed it was 'the internet') and I can't find any others that use that word. The CNN article in the OP didn't. Now, perhaps 'arrested' means only that he was restrained in handcuffs in this context, but I thought there had to be more than that to it.

What to Expect When You Get Arrested in NJ? | William Proetta

If you or someone you know has been arrested in New Jersey, Contact the skilled criminal defense lawyers at William Proetta Criminal Law. Contact us today.

www.hudsoncountycriminallawyer.com

An “arrest” occurs when anyone in the state of New Jersey has been charged with a criminal offense.

In the context of the fight before the police arrived, what made the black boy the 'victim'?

Nope. I’ve already stated that if one merely googles nj mall fight, up pops a whole long list of links saying black teen arrested. Including some of your favorite sources such as The Guardian and the New York Post.

I did google it. And now I've searched The Guardian, though I don't know if I have the same story you are talking about. But in this story, the Guardian does not say the black boy was arrested, but it does quote the other boy saying 'arrested'.

‘Plain old racist’: teen in New Jersey mall fight condemns arrest of Black youth

Youth, 15, was shoved to couch but not restrained, while 14-year-old was handcuffed in incident that went viral

www.theguardian.com

A New Jersey teen who was involved in a mall fight that went viral has said police were wrong to treat him differently than the other youth in the altercation, who is Black.

“I don’t understand why they arrested him and not me,” he said. “I say, that was just plain old racist. I don’t condone that at all.”

I observe: your favorite source, The Daily Mail, has an article entitled "Black boy arrested in viral NJ mall fight..." and a conservative source--NY Post--has a caption below an image that starts "Prior to the arrest..." and another conservative favorite thehill has an article starting "Family of Black teen arrested..."

 

[laughing dog]

Reports that he was arrested are confusing to you?

I would not say 'confusing', I would say 'not consistent with my understanding of a police arrest'. Thehill article you quoted used the word 'arrested', but it is not clear to me what part of the cops actions were an arrest. Was it cuffing the boy and restraining him? Is that an arrest? Was he actually taken to a station and charged with something or held in a cell?

I found a Guardian article that has the white boy talking about the other boy being 'arrested', but I don't know what he meant when he said 'arrested'. Again, was it the restraint and handcuffs that counted?

This is important because the use of the word 'arrest' implies things other than the described events.

Pedantry alert.

The actions are consistent with racism - you agree with that. I have yet to see any counter argument or evidence. If some arises, I will consider it.

Your explanation is. to say the least, lacking, since only one child was cuffed, Doesn't matter which officer did what.

Of course it matters. The reasons for the disparate treatment matter.

You didn't give one. What is the reason for the black child being cuffed and the white child not?

It would be nice to see a rational argument against the racism/bigotry conclusion instead of this insipid defense of white police officers.

I doubt you when you use the word 'nice'. In fact, what I am certain of is that, given the rabid hostility to the notion of even considering other explanations, I think a rational argument would be treated with heavy disdain, accusations of 'defending racists', and accusations of racism against the person making the argument.

That is one of the most cowardly and bullshit rationales for avoiding making an argument that I have read at this site.

 

[Toni]

Where does it say the black kid was arrested?

Where does anyone say the "white kid" was detained, arrested, held up, obstructed, hindered, set back, delayed, slowed down by the police other than to stop him from attacking his victim?

The only story that said 'arrested' was the one linked by laughing dog (which was from thehill, but laughing dog claimed it was 'the internet') and I can't find any others that use that word. The CNN article in the OP didn't. Now, perhaps 'arrested' means only that he was restrained in handcuffs in this context, but I thought there had to be more than that to it.

What to Expect When You Get Arrested in NJ? | William Proetta

If you or someone you know has been arrested in New Jersey, Contact the skilled criminal defense lawyers at William Proetta Criminal Law. Contact us today.

www.hudsoncountycriminallawyer.com

An “arrest” occurs when anyone in the state of New Jersey has been charged with a criminal offense.

In the context of the fight before the police arrived, what made the black boy the 'victim'?

Nope. I’ve already stated that if one merely googles nj mall fight, up pops a whole long list of links saying black teen arrested. Including some of your favorite sources such as The Guardian and the New York Post.

I did google it. And now I've searched The Guardian, though I don't know if I have the same story you are talking about. But in this story, the Guardian does not say the black boy was arrested, but it does quote the other boy saying 'arrested'.

‘Plain old racist’: teen in New Jersey mall fight condemns arrest of Black youth

Youth, 15, was shoved to couch but not restrained, while 14-year-old was handcuffed in incident that went viral

www.theguardian.com

A New Jersey teen who was involved in a mall fight that went viral has said police were wrong to treat him differently than the other youth in the altercation, who is Black.

“I don’t understand why they arrested him and not me,” he said. “I say, that was just plain old racist. I don’t condone that at all.”

I observe: your favorite source, The Daily Mail, has an article entitled "Black boy arrested in viral NJ mall fight..." and a conservative source--NY Post--has a caption below an image that starts "Prior to the arrest..." and another conservative favorite thehill has an article starting "Family of Black teen arrested..."

I didn’t bother reading the body of any of the many links mentioning the arrest of the black teen. I have noticed that a number have revised their headlines to remove the word arrest.

 

[Metaphor]

I observe: your favorite source, The Daily Mail, has an article entitled "Black boy arrested in viral NJ mall fight..." and a conservative source--NY Post--has a caption below an image that starts "Prior to the arrest..." and another conservative favorite thehill has an article starting "Family of Black teen arrested..."

Observe away. What does it mean for Z'Kye to have been arrested? I'm waiting for somebody to explain it to me. If it is nothing beyond being restrained and handcuffed, then my understanding of what a police arrest in NJ is is not correct. So, was it something in addition to being restrained and handcuffed?

 

[Metaphor]

I didn’t bother reading the body of any of the many links mentioning the arrest of the black teen. I have noticed that a number have revised their headlines to remove the word arrest.

Perhaps he was not arrested, and I will be forgiven for my polite enquiries on the matter.

 

[Metaphor]

Pedantry alert.

Yes, when I point out the importance of precision of language and the effect of rhetoric, I'm a pedant. But when you do it, you're never being a pedant.

You didn't give one. What is the reason for the black child being cuffed and the white child not?

What was the reason the male officer cuffed one of the boys and the female officer did not cuff the other boy?

That is one of the most cowardly and bullshit rationales for avoiding making an argument that I have read at this site.

Whether it is 'cowardly' is a matter of perception, I suppose. But it isn't bullshit. It's true.

 

[laughing dog]

Pedantry alert.

Yes, when I point out the importance of precision of language and the effect of rhetoric, I'm a pedant.

It is pedantry when it is used as a tactic to avoid the topic. Given your attempts at "precision of language" are usually failures, it is pedantry as a rhetorical tactic.

What was the reason the male officer cuffed one of the boys and the female officer did not cuff the other boy?

The answer on the table is racism. You have yet to come up with an alternative.

Whether it is 'cowardly' is a matter of perception, I suppose. But it isn't bullshit. It's true.

I believe it is cowardly and bullshit.

 

[Trausti]

The answer on the table is racism. You have yet to come up with an alternative.

No. Lady cop is a pretty good alternative. It's like she didn't know what to do.

 

[Gospel]

You are implying that the black kid was the white boy's "victim" in the fight between them. The video footage I saw does not imply one was a victim over the other. Instead it was escalating tension that reached a fight point.

We're not looking at the same video. I see the criminal with his hand in the face of the victim while making threats in an aggressive manner. The victim was within his rights to defend himself at that point however he only went with shoving the hand away and saying "get your hand out of my face". Then the criminal escalated with a shove which was actual assault and again the victim was justified in responding. Unless you'd like to dispute shoving a threatening hand away from your face isn't assault.

 

[Gospel]

No. Lady cop is a pretty good alternative. It's like she didn't know what to do.

There was a male cop there. What did he do? Oh, he arrested the black kid and left the white one alone too. So it's not just A female officer thing.

 

[laughing dog]

The answer on the table is racism. You have yet to come up with an alternative.

No. Lady cop is a pretty good alternative. It's like she didn't know what to do.

Your alternative explanation is that the male officer did not notice the incompetence of the alleged lady officer and so did not rectify her mistake?

 

[Jarhyn]

The answer on the table is racism. You have yet to come up with an alternative.

No. Lady cop is a pretty good alternative. It's like she didn't know what to do.

Your alternative explanation is that the male officer did not notice the incompetence of the alleged lady officer and so did not rectify her mistake?

Like, they see a situation resolved without violence on one half and with violence on the other, and they think "why not violence for everyone!" Instead of "why not deescalation for everyone"...

Seriously, what is the major malfunction here?

At best this is an argument against "men" being cops, as posed by the bad faith crowd.

I don't buy it though.

 

[Metaphor]

It is pedantry when it is used as a tactic to avoid the topic. Given your attempts at "precision of language" are usually failures, it is pedantry as a rhetorical tactic.

It is not any such thing. A rational discussion is impossible when one side has made up its mind and insists on language that reinforces a foregone conclusion about the facts.

The answer on the table is racism. You have yet to come up with an alternative.

Yes, I already know what your foregone conclusion is.

For this situation, are there any sets of circumstances, any values of the many unknowns that you can imagine, so that the 'answer' would not be 'racism', or at least, not entirely racism?

 

[Metaphor]

We're not looking at the same video. I see the criminal

Your use of the word 'criminal' is begging the question.

with his hand in the face of the victim

Your use of the word 'victim' is begging the question.

while making threats in an aggressive manner. The victim was within his rights to defend himself at that point however he only went with shoving the hand away and saying "get your hand out of my face". Then the criminal escalated with a shove which was actual assault and again the victim was justified in responding. Unless you'd like to dispute shoving a threatening hand away from your face isn't assault.

I can't find footage without a news person talking over it so I can't say who was or was not being verbally threatening. In any case, there are parts of interaction not on any video I've seen that would be necessary to call one of them the 'criminal' and one the 'victim'. For example, were they both sitting down before the fight? Did one of them stand up first and move closer to the other? This yahoo story has some additional details I have not read before:

Personal Finance Home Page - Yahoo Finance

At Yahoo Finance, you get free stock quotes, up-to-date news, portfolio management resources, international market data, social interaction and mortgage rates that help you manage your financial life.

money.yahoo.com

According to Franco, who goes by Joey, the fight on the mall's third floor started when he asked why another teen allegedly planned to jump someone and that teen responded with an aggressive tone.

"I don't mess around with that," Franco said, adding they began arguing before another teen, identified by his lawyer as Z'Kye Husain, stepped up and allegedly said he could beat up Franco. Franco and Husain did not know each other.

I am not willing to make a call on the rightness or wrongness or criminality or victimhood of the two boys with regards to the fight they had with each other, given there is information we surely do not know and the information could cast events in a new light. On the face of it, without other context, Franco's hand in the face and consequent shove give the appearance that he was the bigger aggressor at the start.

But whatever the cops did or did not do to Husain does not reflect on Franco.

 

[Toni]

The answer on the table is racism. You have yet to come up with an alternative.

No. Lady cop is a pretty good alternative. It's like she didn't know what to do.

I’m not sure what you’re saying here: the ‘lady’ cop didn’t know what to do? Was what she was supposed to do—racism? Was she supposed to likewise throw the boy she sat down to the ground, put her knee in his back and cuff him? Arrest him as her partner arrested the other boy?

Did someone read enough articles to gleen that for many ‘Muricans’, the ‘white’ boy was not all that white?

I saw that you ‘liked’ a couple of my posts. I suppose you think that I was backing up your position that the male cop was not motivated by racism in his treatment of the black boy. I wasn’t. I want to be clear about that.

I think that it is pretty obvious that he looked at a young black male and decided he needed to be face down, cuffed. Whether part of his way of dealing with altercations was formed by his male gender or because he lacks the skills necessary to effectively evaluate a situation and deescalate it, we have no way of knowing.

I think almost everyone on this thread would certainly prefer that should their child be involved in a fist fight at a mall, he would be treated as the female officer treated the boy she sat on the bench. I would prefer that any teen involved in an altercation be sat down while matters were sorted out, not slammed to the ground with two officers on his back, bring cuffed while offering zero resistance.

Even the boy he was fighting with thought the black boy was treated unfairly.

 

[Toni]

No. Lady cop is a pretty good alternative. It's like she didn't know what to do.

There was a male cop there. What did he do? Oh, he arrested the black kid and left the white one alone too. So it's not just A female officer thing.

But that doesn’t fit the narrative that female officers are by nature inferior to and subordinate to make officers.

 

[Metaphor]

I’m not sure what you’re saying here: the ‘lady’ cop didn’t know what to do? Was what she was supposed to do—racism? Was she supposed to likewise throw the boy she sat down to the ground, put her knee in his back and cuff him? Arrest him as her partner arrested the other boy?

If she had done that, there certainly wouldn't be one tenth the amount of air time devoted to this brawl.

 

[Metaphor]

No. Lady cop is a pretty good alternative. It's like she didn't know what to do.

There was a male cop there. What did he do? Oh, he arrested the black kid and left the white one alone too. So it's not just A female officer thing.

But that doesn’t fit the narrative that female officers are by nature inferior to and subordinate to make officers.

If the white boy had resisted the female officer in any way, do you think she could have subdued him?