Police can not beat up attacker when he gets attack?

When a person is being attacked you can only use reasonable force to protect yourself; I think a .357 magnum is reasonable, but once you have the attacker subdued he is no longer a threat. The cop should know this.

I don't disagree with what the cop did under the circumstances and I might have done the same thing. The real problem is that these judges see themselves as some sort of God and they like to flex their muscle.

Take a look at all of the rulings that have been made my the 9th Circuit Court, I mean totally stupid rulings and this court is the most overturned court in the nation.

Judges should have to stand trial by the people and let us rule on their jobs, (I'm not talking about just elections, we should be able to file charges against STUPID judges.

I guess in IOWA(Idiots Outside Wandering Around) you can't. You got me this sounds like a serious case of Stupid Pill abuse that needs to be addressed.

I know the DOD guy said that they can only respond with a minimal amount of force. Which if true, is stupid policy, IMHO. But many Law Enforcement Officers, by Dept. Policy and Training are required to respond with a higher amount of force if attacked or confronted.

There is no law that states I cannot defend myself if off-duty and attacked. This Judge is way off and this case is ripe for an appeal.

I would guess this one will be overturned. The officer and his friends left the party and did retreat all the way back to his brother's house. There the officer was assaulted by the pursuing assailant. The judge got this one wrong.

Not sure why they didn't do a jury trial here.

Justgetitright: They don't call it the 9th Circuit Court of Repeals for nothing. The Supreme Court has actually given them refresher courses in some of their rulings overturning the 9th.

First mistake, the officer should have demanded a jury trial.

But, the officer can still appeal the decision. Judges make mistakes of law -- that's why we have appellate courts.

But before you call the judge a moron, check the appropriate laws. The laws of Iowa might require retreat in this situation, in which case the judge was just following the law. As to the sentence, the article covers that -- the judge had no discretion and was require to impose that sentence.

So, check the laws before you call the judge a moron. It might be the laws that are stupidly written, and the judge was just doing what was required by following the law.

I don't know, but if its in you're property, many places gives you the right to defend your property reguardless if you're a cop or not. It may be that the cop shouldn't of beat him so bad. I mean a drunk man would be easy to slam on the ground and hold him there till a cop on duty arrives. No need to beat him almost to death

lol i kno, the judicial system isn't what it should be and just doesnt get it.....here in Texas the person has to be in ur house AND U HAV TO BE OUTSIDE OF IT!!!!!!!!! lol! (true fact) there was a news article in the Austin paper a few yrs ago bout a man who was in his home and an intruder snuck in. he quickly ran outside and opened an unlocked window in the room the intruder was in and swung a bat at him.....killing him. the owner of the house faced 25-life!!! the judge ruled that since half of his body was in the window he was technically inside the house and therefore he should be sentenced accordingly!!

As many have stated, the Least amount of force needed is what you need to use, as for trespassers and/or feeling threatened on your land is bogus in most states, the laws do state "in your home" once outside your home the laws becomes a gray area. I do know as my father is military trained in the event of a fight he could be arrested with the use of deadly force because he is trained in "disposing threats" so i can uderstand where the cop may be found guilty. i dont agree with it but can understand...

An officer should use necessary force only to apprehend a criminal.

Necessary force - the minimum amount of lawful aggression used in order to achieve a legitimate law enforcement objective.

here in georgia if someone is on your property and you feel threatened you can legally shoot them. it used to be you had to wait until they actually attacked you on your property but now it's if someone enters your property and you feel threatened. theres not a lot of trespassing in georgia anymore.

I AM A POLICE OFFICER AND I THINK THE OFFICER HAD A RIGHT TO DEFEND HIMSELF, BUT LAW REQUIRES THAT YOU USE THE MINIMAL AMOUNT OF FORCE, SUCH AS PEPPER SPRAY. BUT POLICE LACK TO MANY RIGHTS.