Police Abuse

Woman's Jersey Beach Beatdown by Police Goes Viral

How did an accusation of underage drinking end up with a 20-year-old eating sand?

|

When a police officer tackled a 20-year-old woman on a New Jersey beach over Memorial Day weekend and then punched her in the head, all over a bottle of Twisted Tea, bystander footage of the beatdown quickly went viral.

For those who missed it, here's the initial video, which has been viewed more than a million times:

It's remarkable that in the crazy-fast, rapid-spin news cycle that now rules us, the story is still getting significant attention a week later. On Wednesday, the Wildwood, New Jersey, police released body camera footage of parts of their encounter with Emily Weinman, 20. If anything, the additional footage highlights how absurd and unnecessary the violence was.

None of the body camera footage shows the initial encounter that led to the confrontation. What we do know is that two Wildwood police officers came across Weinman on the beach. Her family spread included a cooler, and police spotted a bottle of alcohol. Weinman insisted this belong to her aunt, who she said would be coming back soon. (She never shows up during the videos.)

Weinman is not terribly hospitable toward the police, who make her take two breathalyzer tests. You can't really tell what the outcome was, but when all is said and done, she has not been charged with being drunk in public. But she's uncooperative, and she refuses to give police her last name. Eventually an officer has had enough and pulls out the cuffs to arrest her. She's upset by this, so she attempts to walk away. That's when the officer declares "You're about to get dropped," tackles her into the sand, punches her in the head, and arrests her.

The mayor of Wildwood, Ernie Troiano, was quick to come to the defense of the police officers with very little evidence other than his own experience as an ex-bouncer. (I hope to God all mayors in New Jersey are ex-bouncers.) He insisted that Weinman was "by far the aggressor here," then turned to the "she's no angel" tactic, pointing to the fact that Weinman was on probation for a previous crime. (She got into a fight in Philadelphia with a woman she believed was sleeping with her ex-boyfriend.)

The mayor then complained about underage drinking and people's insistence on drinking on the beach. From Philly.com:

"I don't understand why it seems to be that this is a God-given right that they can come here and drink underage," he said, adding that no one is allowed to drink in public or on the beach in Wildwood unless they are attending an event that has received a permit to allow drinking.

So Troiano's argument is that drinking isn't a God-given right; it's a right given by the government. Just because the taxpayers are forced to shell out money to maintain the beach doesn't mean they can just come out there and drink on it, unless they have the government's permission. So you see, they had no choice but to beat up a 20-year-old unarmed woman who was neither drunk nor violent.

It may ultimately turn out that Weinman is, indeed, no angel. It may turn out that she spit at an officer. (It kinds of look like she did as they brought her to the police vehicle.). It may turn out that she was consuming alcohol. But none of that justifies the police's behavior. They decided they wanted to make a lesson out of Weinman, and now the public is repulsed by it. Note the reaction of the bystanders in the video. Several confront the officers about their behavior. At one point one even appears to try to pull the officer off the woman.

Weinman has been charged with two counts of aggravated assault on a police officer, aggravated assault by spitting at or on an officer, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, obstruction, and being a minor in possession of alcohol.

Advertisement

NEXT: From the Archives

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. (She never shows up during the videos.)

    SPOILER ALERT? GOD.

      1. Or “Aunt Flo”.

      2. If only Beckett was from Jersey, this is the play he would have written.

      3. Spoiler alert: Godot never shows.

  2. So where is the explanation of why “None of the body camera footage shows the initial encounter that led to the confrontation.”?
    Any chance at all that the cops do not keep their cameras running in case they ‘fail to follow procedure’, but turn them on when they have decided that some video evidence might become useful? Say just after they abuse a citizen to the point that a reaction is likely?
    If cops have cameras, they should be required to let them run during the whole shift, with the possible exception of bathroom breaks.

    1. The bodycamera footage captures most of the encounter. Fake news. Go to the wp link.

      1. I don’t do wapo fake news, just Reason fake news, and sometimes the Federalist.

      2. Fake MY ASS, that’s a girl being punched in the face by a scared pussy.

    2. with the possible exception of bathroom breaks.

      Fuck that. Newscasters, a judge, and two attorneys can determine that the grand jury doesn’t need to see Officer Doright relieving himself.

      Otherwise, the good officer can make all of his exchanges for throwdown weapons and drugs in the bathroom and forget to turn the camera on and be exonerated as long as his fly is open.

    3. The explanation was given in another article that the cop turned it off and then turned it back on again. We can only guess why he would do that. Certainly it had nothing to do with the cop choosing to escalate the situation.

  3. In b4 “she was resisting/non compliant” so punching her in the head repeatedly is justified (even though she posed zero threat to officer/public safety)

    1. She was laying down on a beach. Clearly a threat. She’s lucky they didn’t account for the baby or the child with her, then they could justify lethal force.

      1. She might have had an assault type military weapon gun-thing buried in the sand next to her!

  4. This is the perfect microcosm of New Jerksey and Filthacrapia wherein EVERYONE involved is varying degrees of a-hole.

    1. Bingo. I’m going to refer this young lady to the instructional video by Chris Rock, “How not to get your ass beat by the police.”

    2. You’re next. Way to be a man, “Fist of I’m superior”.

  5. What a bunch of abusive, useless assholes.

  6. This is NJ. You have no rights. Why don’t people realize that when you go to a progressive liberal state like NJ, the cops are the largest organized crime group (the NJEA coming in a close second) in the state. This is about a close as you can come to a police state anywhere in the US.

    Our 2A rights are in the shitter too.

    When you elect progressive liberals, you get things like NJ. It’s an excellent example of what not to do.

    1. Of course they are. Who needs a gun around when the police are beating the shit out of your wife on a nice beach day?

      1. Lets be honest: even if two cops were definitely in the wrong, if you pulled a gun on them while they’re illegally beating your wife you’re both probably dead no matter what happens. Even if you drop both of them, the system will end you.

        1. It’s an interesting thought exercise. I wonder if there is a legal line cops can cross before a citizen is justified in defending themselves. You would think it might be more lax to use deadly force against a police officer because they’re armed. Anyone know of any cases that would pertain to this?

        2. Probably. But if enough people start doing it, maybe things will change.

        3. gotta happen tho

        4. Texas specifically authorize deadly force to defend yourself from an illegal arrest.

          Of course that doesn’t mean you will survive the encounter.

          1. In 2013, a guy by the name of Henry Magee shot and killed a SWAT cop in Texas who was entering his house through a window, and he was acquitted.

            1. I think in that case the grand jury refused to return an indictment so the prosecutor charged him anyway.

              He’s lucky, most juries are going to side with most cops.

    2. Blame NJ, not proglib states. OCMD is infinitely better run and the police there understand that the 20 year olds in possession of a drink aren’t the enemy in the middle of the afternoon, while peacefully looking after their toddlers.

    3. YES AND, cops are like this everywhere.

      1. No, they actually are not. The cops I encountered living out in the rural west (MT, AZ, ID) were, to a one, much more respectful than almost every other one I’ve dealt with in ‘civilization.’ That they mainly worked solo, and back up might be an hour away probably had something to do with it.

    4. So what is your ratuonalization when police brutality occurs in red states?

  7. When the cop hits you in the face just present them with the other cheek. I did this all the time when I lived in Jerusalem last year. It worked really well. Just make sure you’re at a safe distance and flinch as you offer it. Also tell them you forgive them as they’re punching you – they just love that.

    1. Thank you, sir! May I have another?

  8. New Jersey is an armpit. The beaches are totally classy though.

    1. Rum ham!

  9. Other details and witness accounts suggest she ramped this up herself by acting a bit crazy. There is initial body camera footage….it then gets turned off as the cops start leaving. Then supposedly she said or did something to reinitiate. Supposedly they told her to pour it out, she refused. They told her to then leave, she refused. They then go to arrest her and she walks away.

    Sometimes a beat down is justified. Law enforcement ultimately requires violence as not all humans are sheep. Better just to eliminate the stupid laws. Until then, dont go out of your way to piss off the leos.

    1. Until the Authoritarians see the error of their ways, you should comply with their abusive lap dogs. Yeah… that’ll show em.

      1. Thats not what i said. Watch the bodycamera footage. The two cops where eminently reasonable while she pushed and pushed and pushed.

        1. Two cops holding down a lady and punching her in the face may be understandable in certain circumstances. These circumstances definitely do not fall into that category by a LONG shot.

          1. Police officers get paid to act in a reasonable manner up to a certain point and then go lose their shit and go to town on your face. It’s in the Constitution.

          2. I worked as a customer service representative for a cable company during college. I was paid $12/hr to take verbal abuse and keep my cool. If I ever lost control I would have been fired from that shitty job. Yet we can’t even hold LEOs to these standards? Heroes indeed.

            1. That’s what pisses me of the most. We hold cops to LESSER standards, not GREATER ones.

        2. that is exactly what you said.

          until the authoritarians have their power curtailed, we should all just comply.

          1. So, a leo enforcing a law is now an unreasonable authoritarian?

            Tell that to the cop next time you get a speeding ticket. Fight the power! Friggin child.

            1. Yes- just because they say they are enforcing a law doesn’t make it valid.

              Also, there are times to fight and times to not fight. That decision is irrelevant to whether fight is actually just.

            2. no very stupid motherfucker, a cop tackling her and head punching her over refusing to obey is “unreasonable authoritarian?”

            3. Only children think might makes right. Grown-ups know better,

    2. Sometimes a beat down is justified.

      Yes. When someone is so dangerous or difficult to control that using less force won’t be effective. I don’t think that was the case here.

      1. Watch the bodycamera footage. She ramped this up. She resisted the cuffs for close to a minutes while they wrestled with her before that punch, screaming the whole time.

        It the immaortal words of chief wiggum, why are the pretty ones always crazy.

        1. If 3 officers can’t peacefully, if not gently, restrain a 120lb girl, they’re incompetent. Even if she’s on PCP and Redbull, which Ms. Weinman was clear not.

          The bodycam makes it clear she understands the constitution far better than the part-time-jackboots do.

        2. I just watched it. It’s confirmed. You’re an authoritarian cum guzzler.

          1. And you are obviously a delusional child. Good luck with that.

            1. I hate it when people’s freedom is clearly being violated. I hate it when violence is used against that person until they comply with tyranny… Clearly I’m the delusional one.

          2. MikeP2 is our resident copsucker. It is known.

            1. Nonsense. She was caught breaking the law and refused to comply with legal orders repeatedly. And then tried to fight off being cuffed.

              Act like a animal and get treated like an animal. To hell with your mindless arnarchist

              1. She was not caught breaking the law, and she was refusing illegal orders repeatedly.

                And yes, the cops acted like animals.

                1. It is illegal in nj for someone underage to possess alcohol.

                  There was no illegal order. They were giving her a citation and she refused to provide her name, hence it escalated to arrest.

              2. You’re a right-wing cop succor, MikeP2, slobbering enthusiastically all over that sweet, throbbing authoritarian government power. No doubt conflicted over the thoughts of “gay” and “black” that flicker through your mind as you reassure yourself about how important it is that people like you make sure people like them stay in line.

                Carry on, clinger.

        3. What did she do to warrant being cuffed?

          1. She refused to give her name for the citation, started walking away, and fought against being arrested.

            1. None of that is valid.

              1. That’s nonsensical. If you don’t sign the citation and agree to appear in court at a later date, the alternative is an arrest.

        4. So there was absolutely nothing short of punching her in the head that would have worked? I’m not buying it. I don’t care how poorly behaved she was. The cops are obliged to use the absolute minimum force necessary in any situation.

          They could have done a lot of other things. There was no threat to the cops or to public safety and so no need to immediately control her.

        5. They had no reason to cuff her in the first place, so her resisting was valid.

          Yes, there is a right to resist unjust actions, even if its not fully protected right now.

        6. oh my God you’re actually gonna keep sucking cop dick

        7. She apparently blew 0% BAC twice. She maintains that the beverage was not hers, supported by the breath test evidence. The cops had no probable cause to arrest her or evict her from the beach. If she refused to submit to their unconstitutional demands, she’s a hero in my view. What we have here are gangs of armed thugs sent out by petty politicians to extract fines from harmless people trying to enjoy a day at the beach. But you figure all this justifies punching a 20 year old girl in the head and charging her with a shitload of felonies. Fuck off asshole.

        8. Close to a minute! No wonder they couldn’t handle it any more. But that supreme exercise of patience aside, no punches are thrown until he’s basically sitting on her back. Even if she was kicking, it’s not going to be a threat because she’s not going to be able to get anything above her knee into it. Until we find out she was bin Laden in drag, that makes the cop just an asshole with a temper.

        9. She ramped it up, hope that make you feel good, but MEN de-escalate. We dont punch women in the face. But, perhaps “we” is an over generalization.

      2. She acted “a bit crazy”, Zeb. What don’t you get?

    3. Other details and witness accounts suggest she ramped this up herself by acting a bit crazy.

      Crazy like “I’m going to slit your throats and drink my Twisted Tea from your hollowed out skulls!” crazy or crazy like “It’s not my drink, I’m not pouring it out because I’m not old enough to handle it, and I’m pretty sure an empty glass bottle and a sticky puddle on the beach doesn’t fix anything.” crazy?

      Because one sounds like a felony and the other sounds like someone being backed into a corner.

      1. I seem to recall Reason running a story a while back of a video of an officer at a concert telling a minor concert goer that he could pour his drink our or get a ticket and I generally sided with the officer (or at least didn’t disapprove of his actions).

        This case was rather different as the ultimate punishment was a ticket, the minor complied, and, as a result, neither the minor nor the officer initiated physical aggression. As near as I can tell, it seems like the officers were generally more aggressive/intiating in this exchange. However, ultimately, as is human nature what works in one instance is not applicable as policy to all instances no matter how similar and the cop that navigates the conditions better should be lauded over his peers for doing so.

    4. While it pisses me off, ultimately your advice is the most reasonable.

    5. None of her refusals are justifications for beating her or even arresting her.

      But they believe it was, because she refused to respect their authoritah.

    6. re: “Sometimes a beat down is justified.”

      No, it’s not. And it particularly wasn’t in this case. A “beat down” is punishment. In our system, punishment may only be doled out after an actual trial. Police have no legal authority to punish prior to conviction.

      Police are paid, equipped and trained to deal with situations exactly like this. They are expected to behave professionally even when those they are dealing with do not. Police might, in the right circumstances, be able to use a “fighting words” exception to truly unreasonable provocation. This situation was far from that level.

      She was a jerk. She did not de-escalate the situation. Both, granted. However, being a jerk is not against the law and it’s not her job to de-escalate situations. It is, however, the police officers’ job.

    7. No, a “beat down” is never justified, even if the person being arrested had reacted violently or been violent with someone.

      The only force justifiable is that necessary to complete the arrest.

      The cops are not supposed to “administer justice”, that is for the courts and juries.

      But “dis-respect” a cop and frequently they will administer their justice on you.

  10. If that officer didn’t get her last name to fill out the paper there probably would be more repressions for him then punching her in the head.

  11. No drinking on the beach? What’s the point?

    1. No drinking on the beach? What’s the point?

      Watching the video, I clearly see several points and a couple of good shots of the sides of some points.

      1. Yes, there is that. I’m glad you mentioned it so I didn’t have to be that guy.

    2. An ass whoopin by the the polizia is clearly indicated. Defend the thugs much?

  12. 10-1 she was an obnoxious drunk pain in the ass like many at that age on the beach.

    That doesn’t justify the response, but it certainly didn’t help matters.

    The sooner people realize we’re living in a police state, the better.
    If you are not armed and prepared to kill the cop or die trying, then you should comply.
    They’re not going to let you walk away and they’re not going to let it go just because you yelled and screamed a lot.
    If they want you out of the car, you’re going to be out of the car one way or another.

    When this pendulum swings back, what’s left of the police forces will be sorry they chose the tactics they did.

    1. People really need to stop with this bullshit mentality. It’s perfectly legal to be loud and obnoxious. This is SUPPOSED to be a free country.

      IT’S NOT OK TO BEAT PEOPLE DOWN IN PUBLIC! It’s even more egregious if there’s a gang of you. It’s even worse if the government sanctions and pays you to do it.

      1. Your delusions dont change the reality that the township of wildwood has chosen to enforce its laws. Break the law and youll get cited. Refuse to comply with the citation and youll get arrested. Refuse to comply with the arrest and violence will follow.

        She could have accepted the citation and fought it in court. She refused to do so. To hell with her. She can be free on her own property, or comply with the laws that society has deemed necessary when not on private property.

        I think many laws are bs. doesnt mean i have the right to ignore leos when in public and physically resist them when they decide to arrest me.

        1. The cops entered themselves into a normal situation and then escalated it to the point where they wound holding someone down and punching them in the face. It’s clear what kind of shitty person you are when you’re on the authoritarian’s side.

          Isn’t there a lever in a gas chamber you should be pulling? Maybe there’s some ethnic cleansing needing to be done? It’s ok, i’m sure the government can sanction you to do it.

          1. Apparently i am literally hitler.

            And you are a delusional child who forgot godwins rule.

            1. If she died from a thrown blood clot after taking her clearly deserved authoritarian beating, would you still be guzzling for the ‘heroes?’

            2. That would be figuratively a Nazi, not literally Hitler.

            3. You should go over to the cop websites so you can suck them off directly.

            4. Hitler’s Ghost should rise up from Hades and haunt your copsucking ass for pretending to be anywhere in his class.

        2. You do have the right to ignore leos when they expressly conclude their Terry stop and only then realize they could be writing a ticket toward their quota and need ID/name to do that. Not clear that happened here, but quite possible.

        3. GTFO, copsucker. You are the worst. Cops should be able to deal with an uncooperative citizen without resorting to violence. Did she attack the cops? No. Was she getting arrested? No. Then violence from the cops was not justified.

          1. Yes…she was getting arrested. Do you even pay attention!

            She refused to give her name for the citation and then was in the process of being arrested when she lost what was left of her mind.

            Her 4year probation for a bar fight probably meant she was looking at time.

            1. actually, she was walking aways when she got tackled.

              it wasnt hed who lost their mind.

              1. You obviosly havent even watched the body cam videos.

      2. I didn’t say it was illegal, just that it’s far more likely she was an obnoxious pain-in-the-ass, and not the innocent little beach goer who dindu nothin as seems to be implied here.

        Being an asshole rarely helps things. More so when dealing with the police in today’s low-to-mid level police state.

        I do not call them sir or ma’am and don’t think anyone has to either. I am, however, civil and restrained in the few instances I’ve had to deal with them. I don’t see the point in flipping out, screaming, antagonizing them when they are walking away (as someone here suggests she did), etc.

        My personal anecdote is multiple times around Biloxi during several Mardi Gras paraders over the years, various groups of girls I knew would be smoking cigarettes and the police would tell them to put it out (they were under 18) – “If I see you smoking, I have to tell you to put it out and if I see cigarettes, I have to confiscate them.”
        They would put it out, the police would begin walking away, and one loudmouth would yell “Pig!” or start loudly complaining about how cops suck or something like that. Now the cops come back and are pissed – they threaten arrest for any tobacco violations they observe and for “disturbing the peace”.
        This series of events shows up in spring break videos with drunk idiots fighting with the police or pointlessly antagonizing them after they walk way from an underage drinking (or similar minor) incident.

      3. I do want stricter policies that prevent, via punishment of the officer, them acting in an uncivil manner – yelling, berating, threatening, etc. people when there is no call for it. They have to know how people will react to aggression and it’s not always going to be meek compliance.

      4. We should stop paying them.

    2. She was so drunk she passed two breathalyzer tests.

      1. Voluntarily! I can’t believe there are people on here backing the po-po. WTF!?!!?

        1. Deep down don’t we all want to use the club of government against obnoxious Jerseyites?

        2. I’m not backing the police, just rolling my eyes at the people surprised that a person resisting would end up on the receiving end of force by the police.

          If you walk away when they say they’re arresting you, they’re going to bring you back. If you fight, they’re going to use more force. If you keep fighting, one of them will do what they really wanted to do in the beginning – that is, needlessly escalate in one way or another (the head punches in this instance).

          As I said before, this pendulum will swing back and it’s the police who will be sorry they pushed things like this.

          1. this pendulum will swing back and it’s the police who will be sorry they pushed things like this.

            When have you ever heard of a cop being sorry for anything?

            1. not pulling on a perp and killing him first before his buddies?

          2. The issue is the level of violence used to effect arrest. It was entirely unjustified. If two well-built young male cops cant’ easily subdue and cuff a mouthy 20 y.o. slightly built female w/o having to rabbit punch her on the head, then they’re either a couple of violent, wife-beating assholes, or at minimum they’re grossly incompetent.

      2. But if she was drunk, it would be totally cool to beat the shit out of her, because how a=else are the authoritarians going to feel like they are in charge?

        1. Dopamin monkeys

    3. She blew twice and was not charged with drinking = 0?C. She was charged with possession but clearly had not been drinking.

      1. And if she gets a lawyer who is willing to fight, she will easily beat that possession charge, unless NJ’s underage possession law has more to it than the ones I was familiar with when I was still young enough to care about underage possession laws (which it could – they have some pretty draconian laws about other things).

  13. being a minor in possession of alcohol

    As far as I can tell, the legal age of majority is 18 in New Jersey. Or does possession of alcohol makes a minor out of someone who reached the age of majority but under 21?

    1. When you can be charged as an adult for being a minor in posession of alcohol, something is a bit off with the laws.

    2. Knowing possession under 21 (with exceptions for waiters and cooking schools) in NJ is unlawful.

      1. I get that; but the particular NJ law talks about “Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages“. I further understand that the “being a minor in possession of alcohol” might have been journalistic (mistaken) reference to the linked law — but she’s underage for the purpose of this law, she isn’t a minor at age 20.

        1. I first drank alcohol in NJ when I was 12, glad the police didnt beat me up. I guess those days are over.

    3. “In 1984, Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, which required states to raise their ages for purchase and public possession (of alcohol) to 21 by October 1986 or lose 10% of their federal highway funds.”

      Thank MADD.

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._history_of_ alcohol_minimum_purchase_age_by_state
      Squirrels say my “comment contains a word that is too long (50 characters).” Remove space before “alcohol.”

      1. IT’S FOR THE CHILDREN YOU MONSTER!

        #firethisguy

        1. Yeah. Fuck the 10th.

    4. Are used to think that too, until I actually became a lawyer and read the statute. Under New Jersey law, anyone aged 18, 19, or 20 is deemed a minor “to whom the privileges of adulthood have been extended” unless otherwise provided. Technically, therefore, she was still a minor although certain “privileges” of adulthood have been extended to her.

      Of course, what New Jersey refers to as the “privileges of adulthood” are, in reality, the inalienable rights in which we are all endowed by our Creator and which we receive as our birthright, not as a “privilege” extended to us by the government. But this is beyond the comprehension of most New Jersey legislators.

      1. Here’s where you learn that the Garden of Eden is NOT in New Jersey, and God given rights do not apply in New Jersey. If NJ does not explicitly permit it, it is forbidden.

        1. That, unfortunately, is the New Jersey mentality.

        2. Blue Oyster Cult put it well some 41 years ago…”This ain’t the Garden of Eden, there ain’t no angels above. And things ain’t the way they’re supposed to be, and this ain’t the Summer of Love”.

          Goddamned straight. RIP, Allen Lanier.

      2. As is how “Joisy” treats the Second Amendment.

  14. “drinking isn’t a God-given right; it’s a right given by the government.” No, actually the government is not the source of rights under our constitution; which is supposed to eb a brake on the governments limiting and taking rights of the governed.

    1. Yeah, actually, drinking IS a God-given and/or science-given and/or natural right, provided its my alcohol and I’m not infringing on the rights of anyone else

    2. That’s the result of decades of brainwashing in GOVERNMENT schools.

      This young woman has a right to drink in the privacy of her own home; IF her husband or parents or guardian with whom she resides provides the alcoholic beverages as she can’t legally procure them.

      What is termed “Bill of Rights” is to restrain the Government; it was what the faction then called the Anti-Federalists were all worked up about in fears that the new and stronger Federal Government would have no legal restraints versus the several states or the people. Didn’t matter in practice, as forcefully set forth by our 16th President,”Dishonest Abe”.

  15. Procedures were followed and following procedures always goes well for the cops, why can’t everybody else learn to just follow procedures?

  16. Procedures were followed and following procedures always goes well for the cops, why can’t everybody else learn to just follow procedures?

  17. I watched the video — the whole thing happened because the police were jerks. They got pissed because she wasn’t ‘cooperative’ and decided to give her a citation. She refused to give her name. She shouldn’t have run off, but definitely this whole thing was blown out of proportion by the cops who could simply have let the whole thing go.

    1. Bullshit. cops dont have the right to decide what laws they wish to enforce. Equality under the law is supposed to be the ideal. They are paid to enforce the law, not “let the while thing go”. If you dont like the law, then get rid of it. Otherwise, enforce it across the board.

      1. Mind you, if you do try to “get rid” of the law, police unions will spend millions of dollars on lobbying and television commercials to stop you and threaten to fund opponents to any lawmakers who support the change.

      2. MikeP2 is either 1) a cop, 2) fucking a cop, or 3) one of those ignorant asshats that believe the government “First Responder” propaganda bullshit force fed to us, particularly at sporting events. I am guessing #3.

        1. Either way… he’s a cop sucker.

        2. Further, it is wholly beside the point. The law can be enforced without the necessity of three large, armed male police officers punching a small, bikini clad 20-year-old woman repeatedly in the back of the head while she lays on the ground.

          I have seen police department videos of large men being taken down and handcuffed with less force being used.

      3. Cops absolutely decide which laws they choose to enforce, whether or not they have that right. It is what pisses rational people off. Have an FOP sticker on your car? Here’s a warning for speeding instead of a ticket. You jaywalked Mr Baldwin? Here’s a ticket, let’s discuss further downtown.

        1. Officially they are given discretion with some laws, and must enforce others. Like domestic violence for example. Any suspicion and someone must be arrested.

          In practice they do whatever they want. If they don’t like you you’re fucked. If they like you, or if you’re a cop or family of a cop, they’ll likely let you go.

      4. So, would you like the police to start giving tickets every time they clock someone 1 MPH over the speed limit?

        If you dont like the law, then get rid of it.

        That option is not available to me.

        In a better world, the only laws on the books would be ones that should always be enforced. But we are so far from that state of affairs, and legislators have so little motivation to repeal laws, that that just can’t work.

        1. People who say things like that are dishonest or stupid. Government is a one-way ratchet. Laws are rarely if ever repealed. These people see themselves as makers, not destroyers.

          1. “are dishonest or stupid”

            why not both?

      5. And everyone has the right to obey their consicence and act accordingly and face any consequences that come with that.
        I think everyone has a line beyond which “just doing my job” is no excuse. In my view, these cops crossed that line (as do almost all cops since they routinely enforce laws against drugs and other consensual “crimes”).
        Rule of law is a nice idea, but:
        1. It can only work if the laws are rules that most people would generally follow with or without a law; and
        2. It’s not a real thing. Laws can’t do shit. People rule.

        1. One dead giveaway that a law is unjust is if an official says something like “my hands are tied” or “the law is the law.”

      6. “Prosecutorial discretion”, MikeP2. Look it up.

      7. That is ridiculous and you know it. Cops exercise discretion ALL the TIME in the enforcement of laws. There are so many laws on the books that they cannot possibly enforce all of them, so they pick and choose according to, I dunno… probably whatever brings in the most revenue to the state coffers. They could have let this thing go. The bottle wasn’t opened, she wasn’t drinking and she said it belonged to her aunt. They didn’t even know her age — just what she TOLD them her age was. Quite obviously if she intended to violate the law she could have just lied and said she was 22.. and they could have demanded proof, but there is no law that says you have to carry ID on you at all times to prove your age. They were just being the normal authoritarian ass-wipes that they usually are.

        Of course if she had been black and/or male (or God forbid a black male) they probably would have just rolled up and starting beating the crap out of her

    2. Running from cops tends to be a bad idea. I think it was Chris Rock who said, if you run from a cop, he WILL chase you, and he’s bringing an ass-whooping with him.

      1. Walk away and you’ll get a beat down. Turn your back and you’ll get a beat down. Don’t do what you are told and you’ll get a beat down.

        1. Obey only one of the conflicting sets of instructions being shouted by different cops simultaneously (“Hands behind your back!” “Hands up!” “Get down on the ground!”), you’ll get at least a beatdown.

          1. In that scenario, you’re lucky if all you get is a beatdown

    3. The problem with refusing to give her name when the officer is writing a citation is that he then has the authority to effect an arrest; the idea is to keep minor bs infractions from being escalated into criminal proceedings, which are overblown for the miscreant behavior involved and would just uselessly take up court and policing agency time. Had they PEACEFULLY arrested her, and employed a reasonable level of force to effect arrest, that would have been it, and the mouthy little bitch would have herself to blame for spending the rest of her weekend in the slammer until she posted bail…which might cost her more than the fine, which in this case a judge would likely hit her with the maximum allowable.

      Instead, these asshole cops “lost it” when she was “uncooperative” and resorted to unlawful, if not downright criminal behavior, themselves. That will cost the city of Wildwood, NJ, plenty, and all we learn is (1) what we already know: some COPS are belligerent assholes that have no business being a “peace” officer (2) their municipalities or states and fellow cops. let alone their UNIONS, will back them up no matter how egregious their misconduct, and (3) record, Record, RECORD ALL encounters with law enforcement!

  18. Weinman is not terribly hospitable toward the police, who make her take two breathalyzer tests.

    Did she refuse the breathalyzer tests? There’s no “implied consent” laws for beaches that I’m aware of.

    1. A few states have tried some form of required breath tests for people under 21 suspected of being intoxicated, but they usually get tossed out in court. Some have tried making it a civil offense with $100 fines or similar nonsense.

    2. You, sir, are obviously unaware of the little known codicil to the New Jersey constitution that allows police officers to put beachgoers on double secret probation.

      1. I’m from NJ, but I avoid the beaches due to my dislike of Canadian tourists and Philadelphians.

  19. By every measure, US police are the most violent among the developed westernized world. They have been trained to equate overwhelming for with safety. If fact, a good majority of police departments consider themselves paramilitary organizations. The fact of the matter is, that our police have no problem physically assaulting any citizen for any reason and it has been deemed good police practice and accepted by the public. Yes….the girl was b–ch. She didn’t deserve a beat down.

    1. The police serve and protect the public, with the public being everyone except any individual. Individuals serve and obey the police. The public is an abstraction. It doesn’t really exist. In reality we are the servants and they are the masters.

    2. Well, to be fair the police are a kind of paramilitary organization, but they seemed to be able to conduct themselves in the past without beating every passerby they saw. Something has changed and it’s very disturbing.

      I suspect it has something to do with court precedent and union style accountability.

      1. Nah… they just beat black people (and other ‘undesirables) and no one gave a shit or believed it. What changed? Camera phones and social media

      2. In 1987, the first (and best) Robocop movie put it well, with a then-futuristic (and very dystopian, but uncannily accurate) portrayal of Detroit (set in the year 1997, from what I recall) has the Detroit PD operated by a large government contractor called “OCP”, run by a corrupt CEO played by the late Ronny Cox. He has just bailed out one of his minions, Clarence Boddicker, a gangster played by Kurtwood Smith (before he was putting his foot in Topher Grace’s ass), and they discuss how to deal with Robocop (Peter Weller). When Boddicker brings up that he needs military-style weaponry (in the bad boys’ arsenal is a Barrett M82), the CEO remarks, “Hell…we practically ARE the military”.

        Much to what would be the dismay of our Founding Fathers, some 31 years later, life has truly imitated art.

  20. Weinman has been charged with two counts of aggravated assault on a police officer, aggravated assault by spitting at or on an officer, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, obstruction, and being a minor in possession of alcohol.

    So, seven counts of refusing to bow and scrape.

  21. She wasn’t violating anyone’s rights and she wasn’t violent. Therefore the cop is the agressor and the woman had every right to defend herself from the agression.

    1. Yes, and it clearly worked out well for her.

      Outnumbered and unarmed makes for bad odds in this situation.

      1. we get that you’re a bootlicking pussy who won’t stand up for himself

        1. If you walk away from an arresting officer, you deserve the beat down that’s going to follow. It really is that simple. This was a good learning opportunity for the dumb girl. Hopefully now she has a better understanding of the law.

          1. Sad that you believe that “walking away” is an excuse for a ‘beat down’ from the police, whom are supposed to “PROTECT AND SERVE”. Take a break from felating your local LEO, Myshkin78.

  22. She wasn’t violating anyone’s rights and she wasn’t violent. Therefore the cop is the agressor and the woman had every right to defend herself from the agression.

    1. They’re not worried. The only way someone her size could defend herself from someone like them would be a firearm. Those aren’t legal in NJ.

  23. That girl looks like she weighs maybe a buck twenty-five and isn’t even fighting back. A beat-down by two grown men was obviously the only way to protect the public safety.

  24. Look! The cops got home safe. Isn’t that what really matters?!? EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES!!!

    1. Somehow methinks that their respective wives or girlfriends (or both) are safe from THEM.

  25. Q: Know why people in New York City are always pissed off?

    A: The light at the end of the tunnel is New Jersey.

  26. Cops do not enforce the law. They enforce their will. Do what they say or else. Doesn’t matter if their commands are lawful or not, that is not up for us peasants to decide. At least that’s what the courts say. Obey or you will be beaten or killed. And nothing else will happen.

    Land of the free to ask permission and obey orders.

  27. That’s just nuts! When all she had to do was pull out her white privilege card…

  28. (I hope to God all mayors in New Jersey are ex-bouncers.)

    Not all of them. Some are ex-EDM DJs.

  29. When you tell a person who is in a panic and fearing for their safety to “stop resisting” they can’t do anything about it. It’s the fight or flight reflex and most of the “resisting” is your body just trying to flee and it’s not a conscious choice. That’s completely different from a person who is running or fighting to get away because they don’t want to be arrested.

    Police know this and use it to their advantage- if they grab someone, hurt them and hold them down, in the end, even if they prove they haven’t done anything wrong, they can still get them for resisting arrest because it is almost physically impossible to stay calm and submissive.

  30. A bunch of blue thugs beat up a young adult because she was in the vicinity of a liquid they don’t approve of. There was no victim until they got involved.


  31. …he said, adding that no one is allowed to drink in public or on the beach in Wildwood unless they are attending an event that has received a permit to allow drinking.

    Kneel before Zod!

  32. Nice side boob around :52!

  33. I don’t know what word best describes three armed men beating and kidnapping a girl whom had not harmed anyone, but it sure isn’t ‘heros’.

  34. I thought that the 21st Amendment to the United States Constitution was our “permit” to drink in public. Silly me.

    1. I think they were enforcing state law, and the 21st Amendment recognizes state law, even to the extent of letting states forbid the import of intoxicating liquors.

      The 18th and 21st Amendments reinforce the idea that the federal government can’t pass buzz-killing prohibition laws, though that lesson has it seems been forgotten.

      1. Prohibitionist bigots clearly still believe in threatening physicians and women through initiation of force. There is a massive learning disability on display there.

  35. I see a lot of ‘a cop once caught me running a red light and wrote me a ticket’ going on here. If a grown man can’t restrain a young woman without punching her in the head, he’s doing something wrong. But there’s far more than that going on here at Reason. I’m in my 60s, and somehow I’ve been able to get here without being arrested, much less punched by a cop. And I had many more interactions with cops than this angel ever will.

    1. Well, she had enough interaction to be on probation – – – – –

    2. I’m in my 60s, and somehow I’ve been able to get here without being arrested, much less punched by a cop.

      What is it that you think this proves?

      1. Jon’s been pulling tricks for years and throws the cops a lot of freebies?

  36. this whole story sounds like an episode from Jersey Shore

  37. The best narrative for the police here is probably “see, we told you we weren’t racist!”

  38. The bottles were not open. She says that and the cop confirms it–and then suggests that ‘open’ can refer to ‘open display’ which it does not.

    Having been stopped on that very same beach, for the very same thing, by police, I know that. They gave us the choice of pouring it out, or removing it from the beach.

    The girl was doing absolutely nothing illegal when she was approached. She voluntarily submitted to breathalyzer tests (2) that she passed.

    That was when the police should have left. From that point on they were completely in the wrong.

  39. (1) Government restrictions on drinking on a public beach are questionable at best.

    (2) You don’t address that issue by starting a physical fight with the police, and if you do, you deal with the consequences. Police are required to enforce even laws they disagree with.

    (3) Based on the video footage, we simply don’t know who is responsible for starting the confrontation, let’s wait with our outrage until after evidence has been presented at trial.

    (4) This is a local matter. If Bumfuck Beach, NJ, wants to be a little totalitarian shithole, that’s their business. Seriously, who goes to the beach in NJ anyway?

    1. Based on the video footage we know that the alcoholic beverages were in closed containers. We know that the victim took two breathalyzer tests–which she passed. And we know that initially she was cooperative.

      This means that no crime was committed or in the process of commission.

      What we don’t know is why the police walked up on the girl in the first place.

  40. Her treatment is inexcusable, but at the same time how stupid to you have to be to get confrontational with police while you’re on probation? If ever there’s a time for, “Yes, officer. I understand, officer,” etc., it’s when you can already be automatically sent to jail for looking crosseyed at a cop.

  41. So the jackbooted minions ganged up on a girl to protect the Eighteenth Amendment from violation? Gosh, how courageous! How manly! How Christian!

  42. Lets call it. These are not men, they are boys. No, they are worse, they are blue tribe zombies! I grew up in Jersey, and have met many mouthy women. Never, NEVER AT ANY AGE, have I felt the need to punch a woman, who clearly had no physical advantage, IN THE FACE. The police unions and others who defend this behavior are just as guilty. The police may want to be SUPER SAFE, for officer safety that is, not public safety…Jersey may be full of assholes, but we WILL tell you when you are full of shit.

  43. Same story. Too many police. Not enough crime.

  44. “That’s when the officer declares “You’re about to get dropped,” tackles her into the sand, punches her in the head, and arrests her.”
    You, conveniently, leave out the fact that she clearly attacked the officer first and there is nothing to indicate that she was “punched in the head”.
    I’ve seen the full video, so I am fully aware of what happened and that YOU, Scott Shackford, have left out a great deal.

    Want to rewrite this and include the whole story?

    1. And before I forget, here is the body cam footage:
      https://tinyurl.com/yblmqe9c

  45. Can’t dis-respect the boys in blue can we?

    Society would surely break down then.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.