[QUOTE=desertrunner;969956]
Quote Originally Posted by jsearles22 View Post

What type of proof would you possibly accept? Wouldn’t the interpretation of a policy pretty much always be one persons opinion?
Take the actual policy and compare it to the actions of the accused. If his actions are in alignment of the policy OR not in alignment of the policy, then let the cards fall where they should.

LOL at being painted so far into a corner that the straw you’re grasping is “the chief of fucking polices opinion on department policy carries little to no weight at all.”
The chief is one witness only, just one. He is giving his own opinion only, its not "law" or supersedes evidence in the case. Police chiefs make mistakes all the time and they are not the "gods". Again, just because he has rank in the agency, doesnt mean his opinion only is some final word or ends the case. Department policy is the law here and whether the officer followed it or not. An opinion is just that, an opinion, not proof.
Again, what proof would you accept? A meter gauging the amount of force? Because clearly a fucking video isnt enough to convince you that excessive force was applied when the policy said it should not be. Departmental policy 5-300 mentions he should use "light to moderate pressure." So quit fucking spinning and tell me what proof given that set of facts you would accept?