Scott of Farmingdale, ME Sam of Allover, ME:

Great comment!

KAM of Portland, ME:

a) he was speeding (according to the officer).
b) he was drunk.
c) he never resisted arrest (according to first a jury, and second a federal courts' appellate judge).
d) the officer used excessive force by administering his taser on an unarmed, non-violent, non-threatening/confrontational individual (according to video & a jury & judge's decisions).

Then the village idiots wonder why a judgment of $111,000 was awarded to the suspect turned victim. HAHA!report abuse

Scott of Farmingdale, ME Shawn Cram of Hollis, ME, tom of Steuben, ME, & Darren McLellan of Cape Elizabeth, ME :

VERY WELL PUT!!!

Heather of Watervillle, ME, Lester of Jay, ME, blackcat of Portland, ME, & kidatheart of Portland, ME:
think about the judgments in this case before you just simply run off & defend any officer just because.
A JURY of the officer's peers saw through all of the, "not me, not me, I'm an officer of the law, you gotta believe me."
Dash cameras do not lie, and that was a major factor in the decision of this case from the jury, the judge, and the federal court judge when the appeal failed. I think we all know that the officer would have been better off if it was simply his story against the drunk driver’s, with nothing on camera or witnessed.report abuse

Sam of Allover, ME Hmmm. Love the "kill them all" pundits. Seems as though a jury made the determination. Second guessing a jury decision without all of the evidence and facts is pretty ignorant. That's why we have a judicial system - to avoid the obvious lynchings that would occur by the village idiots.report abuse

KAM of Portland, ME Stephen Parker is a loser.

a.) he was speeding
b.) he was drunk
c.) he resisted arrest
d.) Officer Gerrish warned him if he continued to resist, he would be tased
e.) he ignored the warning and made advances toward Officer Caldwell.

then he wonders why he got tased. what a joke.report abuse