Sheriff Claims Viral Cop Video Is ‘Misleading’ — So I Found the Missing Footage

本站添加: 2026-05-15

[00:00:00]Chris Nixon posted body cam video to  Facebook showing him getting attacked by deputies with the Lion County, Nevada  Sheriff's Office. It showed a brutal attack by a heavily tattooed and aggressive deputy  against a suspect who was at worst failing to follow orders during a minor traffic  investigation. Weapons pass identified.

[00:00:27]Get out. Get out of the car. Get out  of the car. Taser. The unedited body cam footage just looked really bad to  the public. It started to go viral. I got him. Don't shoot. I got him. Get on  the ground. Serious. I'm you up, dude.

[00:00:48]Keep it up. Keep it up. Turn around. So then  it makes its way to the local TV news stations.

[00:00:54]Tonight, the sheriff's office released the full  body cam footage leading up to the arrest, showing roughly 4 minutes where deputies say Nixon was  uncooperative. At that point, the sheriff steps in and makes a public statement about the incident.  The sheriff tells the local TV news that he fully supports the actions of the deputies, claiming  that Chris had misled the public by leaving out the first 5 minutes of the body cam footage. Lion  County Sheriff Brad Pope is pushing back against a viral video claiming to show unnecessary  use of force in the arrest of Chris Nixon, saying the other video leaves out the 5 minutes  leading up to the arrest. He says doing so was a deliberate attempt to make deputies look bad and  it was the suspect who escalated the situation.

[00:01:36]And so the sheriff provided that missing five  minutes of footage to the TV news. So the TV news showed some of this missing 5 minutes but not all  of it. So I ended up obtaining it myself and I'll show it to you in full. I also tracked down Chris  himself to hear his side of the story. It's almost like I didn't have time to respond to anything.  I was I was in the process of talking to the other deputy and at that point like my door opens  and then I turn around and I'm hit in the face, you know, and they're telling me I'm not  complying, but they're hitting, you know, like it's it's a little hard to do when your taser  didn't punch. So, I'll show it to you and then you can tell me. Does that missing 5 minutes change  anything? Cameras, don't worry. Everybody's video, dude. You'll see on the news. And of course,  I'll tell you what I think. Let's go through it.

[00:02:29]It all started with a call about a suspected  drunk driver, a white car that was allegedly driving up on sidewalks. The suspect was  reported to be driving a white car. An officer locates a white car matching the description  sitting in the parking lot of a gas station.

[00:02:44]As best as I can tell, this was actually the  correct car that was tied to the complaint.

[00:02:51]The officer approaches the passenger window  of the car, which is not running at the time, and he knocks on the window,  ordering the window to be opened.

[00:03:17]Can you open the door then?

[00:03:36]67 Frank. Take a second. After a few moments,  the suspect then starts the car so that he could roll the window down. They're not  answering the door and starting the car.

[00:03:59]Hey, finally. Hey. Hey. Hey. Yeah. What's  going on? Not much, man. After the car window rolls down, the officer sees the suspect,  Chris Nixon, sitting in the driver's seat along with an unidentified male passenger. The  officer can immediately see that there is an open alcoholic beverage in the cup holdover.  What's going on? Not much, man. How much you guys had drink today? Huh? How much you guys had  drink today? Uh, not a whole lot, like we uh here um trying to talk to. Okay. The officer  immediately asks him how much he had to drink. He then explains that somebody had called  and said that he was driving on sidewalks. The officer then asks for ID. Okay. Well, reason  I'm out with you, it's not just chance. Someone said you were like driving on sidewalks and  stuff. Okay. You guys got your IDs with you?

[00:05:02]Can I see your guys IDs?

[00:05:07]Is there a reason why? Yeah, I need to see  your guys' IDs. I'm not going to ask you again.

[00:05:13]Yeah. I need to see your IDs. I don't have an  ID. You don't? Do I need one? No. It's just the easiest way. Most people have an ID. Do you  have an ID? Uh, no. Okay. What's your last name? What is it? What is it? Dixon. Dixon.  They both respond that they don't have IDs.

[00:05:38]Then the officer begins to ask for identifying  information in lie of IDs such as names. What's your first name? Richard. Richard. Huh?  What's your first name? Chris is initially cooperative and he provides his last name, but  then he stops and begins to ask questions. Why are you guys sweating? Okay. The officer  then stops the questioning. He then walks behind the car and calls for backup to quote  step it up. Six Franks in route. Step it up.

[00:06:25]The officer then walks back over to the open  passenger side window and he says, "Okay, I'm going to ask you one more time for your  ID and then you're getting out of the car."

[00:06:33]Notably, the officer doesn't actually  order Chris or the passenger out of the car at this time. He does instruct  Chris to take his hand out of his pocket, and Chris complies, showing both hands to the  officer, demonstrating that he is not a threat.

[00:06:49]Okay. You say your last name's Dixon. What's  first name? Um, do you have a reason to Yes, I do. Someone called you in as possibly  being intoxicated, running over stuff.

[00:06:58]I come here. There was a twist. Who called me  in? I don't know. Oh, there was a twist in the center. Get your hand out of your pocket.  What? Get your hand out of your pocket.

[00:07:12]Turn the car off and give me the keys. Chris  asks, "Am I under arrest?" The officer replies, "You're about to be." Give me the keys to the car.

[00:07:25]They're in the ignition. Yeah, I know.  Okay. Get your hands out of your pockets, dude. No, dude. Uh, why did you pull Get  your hands out of your pockets. Pull me over. Am I under arrest? You're about to be.  As he's saying this, unbeknownst to Chris, another officer, the backup, has arrived and  he's walking up behind the driver's side door of Chris's car. The first officer then directs  the newly arrived backup officer to quote, "Get him out of the car." And he also notes  that the passenger is also refusing to identify himself. Am I? You're about to be.  Get him out of the car. Get him out of the car. There's a passenger, too. Passenger is  not identifying either. Get out of the car.

[00:08:11]So, what you just watched was  the missing 5 minutes of footage.

[00:08:15]Everything that happened prior to the body  cam video of the other officer beginning, which is what Chris had originally posted  on Facebook. So now looking at the body cam of this new responding officer, we see  him jerk open the driver's side door and immediately grab onto Chris's neck and  he says, "Let's go, mother. Let's go.

[00:08:38]Get out. Get out of the car. Get out the  Get out of the car. Get out of the car."

[00:08:44]Then within seconds, he punches Chris in the  face repeatedly. Chris keeps his hands where they are visible in somewhat of a surrender  position, though he still does have his right hand gripped onto the steering wheel of the car.  It's not until that point after the officer had already repeatedly punched Chris in the face,  that the officer then orders Chris out of the car. The officer then aims his taser at Chris,  as Chris's hands are held up, with one in the surrender position and the other still gripped  onto the steering wheel of the car. At this point, this officer had been at that scene less than  1 minute, and only about 11 seconds had elapsed since first making contact with Chris. Then,  around 15 seconds from the point of the first contact as Chris has his hands up and they're  visible, he then gets tased via the taser's dart mode and Chris cries out in pain. Really? Get out  of the car. Get out of the car. Taser. Tas. Taser.

[00:09:45]car. Hey, we got to go. Hands on. Coming. Hands  on. Coming. Hands on. Dude, you got that on the ground, dude. For that. Get on the ground. Both  officers then repeatedly scream for Chris to get out of the car, which he then begins to attempt  to do. As Chris struggles to get out of the car, there's very little space to step out between the  vehicles. The officers are aiming their tasers at him, threatening to tase him again, and now  screaming at him to get on the ground. The one officer then begins to put gloves on, and he  instructs the other officer not to tase him, that he's going to handle it. Then he walks  towards Chris and says, "I'm going to you up, dude. You're lit up again. Don't let him up. I  got him." So, get on the ground now. I got him.

[00:10:32]Don't shoot. I got him. Get on the ground.  Serious. I'm going to [ __ ] you up, dude.

[00:10:40]Keep it up. Turn around. Hands on your back.

[00:10:48]Hands on your back. On your backing hand, dude.  The officer grabs onto him, places him in sort of a headlock, and then basically throws him  several feet away down onto the asphalt.

[00:11:01]Chris lands on his back and then they grab  him again and now they tell him to be on his stomach even though they just threw him  onto his back. And you can see that Chris's face is already bloodied. And also the back of  his head appears to have impacted the asphalt when he was thrown down to the ground. The two  officers then jump on top of him and tell him to stop resisting to get on his back, though  they are on top of him as they're saying it, holding on to his arms and placing their weight  on him. One of the officers says, "Tase him again, dude. Tase him again, dude. I have not done a  thing. Stop resisting. Knock it off." Meanwhile, the passenger is standing outside the passenger  side door of Chris's car since he was told to get out of the car. Although he does nothing other  than what he was told to do, the same officer who slammed Chris points at the passenger and says,  "Sit on the ground or I'm going to [ __ ] you up, too." Stay there. Get on the ground. You sit on  the ground right now. I'm going to [ __ ] you up, too. Stay on the ground. Stay on the ground  now. Hook him up. I'm going to this dude up, too. I'm not going to knock it off. Stay  down. Stay down. Then the heavily tattooed officer goes over and he grabs onto that guy,  shoves him face first down onto the concrete, and he tells him not to move. And he says, "I'll  beat your ass." Hey, get over here. I got him.

[00:12:28]You're good. Get on the ground. Get on the ground.  I'm not on the ground. Get on the ground. What's going on? Get on the ground. What are you doing  here? Knock it off. Do not move. Beat your ass.

[00:12:50]Meanwhile, it's unclear whether that guy is  under arrest. What he's under arrest for.

[00:12:54]He's handcuffed behind his back, face  down. So, the second officer had only been on the scene for a little over four  minutes, and he had already engaged in a significant amount of violence. Was this level  of violence necessary? Was it justified? Dude, you guys are on camera. Yeah, I know. Hey, look  at the blood on my turn. I know. I'm searching him. What? What the [ __ ] am I doing? What  am I doing wrong? You're under arrest. For what? Let's go. For what? Let's go. No, dude.  I'm going to put you on the ground again. No, dude. What the are you doing? Stay here. Stay  on my side. Dude, are you guys on camera? Yeah, I am. Yeah. [ __ ] it off. You're done. [ __ ]  it off. I got you. I got all day long. Hey, you're under arrest right now. All right,  but I'm put you in my car just for now. Okay, mind grabbing my smokes. I will grab those,  bro. Dude, what did I do to you? Put a bit of money in that. I'll grab her right now.  I'll put it in my car. Okay. Like I said, right now you're not under arrest. I'm under  arrest. You're not. Okay. I don't this guy. Okay.

[00:14:22]Dude, you [ __ ] slam my face off  the [ __ ] pages, bro. Listen, you get out of the car, turn around, put a  handcuffs on, you're done. That's it. You wouldn't get [ __ ] up like this for what?  Not listening, dude. It's not hard. A [ __ ] three-year-old can do it. Really? Yes. A  three-year-old can [ __ ] listen. Dude, I didn't do nothing. Okay, you're done. You  have the right to remain silent. Shut up.

[00:14:48]No. Damn. You can breathe. You're fine. We'll  get you back. No, I'm not [ __ ] breathing. We're going to get an ambulance to come check out. Oh  my god, dude. Get me an ambulance. Please. Please.

[00:14:58]Hey, mying head is off the goddamn concrete. You  got tased twice. You didn't listen, dude. Are you seriously? Yeah, dude. I didn't do a thing  wrong. You didn't listen? Was the first part, dude? What the [ __ ] am I doing?

[00:15:21]No, that don't work.

[00:15:28]Dude, what did I do? You have the right  to remain silent. Please use it. Sir, are you honestly an officer? I have a badge, don't I? Are you blind, too? Jesus,  dude. Dude, stop talking, please. [ __ ] Dude, are you serious? Yep. There. Now you can  move however you want. Dude, I'm not a [ __ ] Am I a take? You're just under arrest, dude. Are  you okay? No. You don't get the side anymore, dude. You're under arrest. No, I'm not.  Yeah, you are. You're going to jail today.

[00:16:10]Dude, you guys are [ __ ] strongarming.  outside. Welcome to Lan County, dude. I can play with your dude. What  did I do? Single. You got him. Yep. Go.

[00:16:29]I don't know. He's going to fight  the whole time. Hey, calm down.

[00:16:35]Get the gurnie. We'll put him on the gurnie.

[00:16:40]Were you ever charged with any sort of driving  offenses? No, I it was open container and resisting that I um got bled down to resisting  and then I got time served for that. I don't think he's pushing DUI cuz I don't think he was  just hanging out. So, they didn't charge you with DUI from this incident either? No. Cameras, don't  worry. Everybody's videoing, dude. You'll see it on the news. Dude, what the [ __ ] is this? And  to your understanding, what what were you pleading to? What what was the resisting that you allegedly  committed? I don't think that I resisted. I feel like I was kind of in a situation of duress even.  The issue here isn't whether the officer had the right to ID the suspect or to detain the suspect  or to order him out of the car or even to arrest him for failing to comply with his directives. The  issue is whether the manner in which those things were done was excessive under the circumstances  and therefore a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

[00:17:41]This was not a very serious situation. This  was a report of bad driving, possibly a DUI investigation, and then it turned into a situation  of alleged non-compliance, failure to provide ID, eventually failure to get out of the car. This  was not an emergency of any sort. Nobody had been threatened with any harm. Yet, these officers went  almost immediately to violence, including punching in the face, repeatedly, tasing and slamming this  guy's head down onto the concrete, which are all significant levels of force, not a trivial amount  of force. Nevada is in the Ninth Federal Circuit, which has held that mere refusal to comply with an  officer's orders is not sufficiently serious so as to justify tasing or other intermediate levels of  force. Gralet v. Shelton is a 2013 case from the Ninth Circuit where police officers were denied  qualified immunity where the suspect did not respond to officer's orders and then the officers  tased him in dart mode just like happened here.

[00:18:43]In fact, cases in the Ninth Circuit dating back  to 2001 have established that a failure to fully or immediately comply with an officer's orders  neither rises to the level of active resistance nor justifies the application of a non-trivial  amount of force. In other words, if a suspect just isn't listening or refusing to comply with  orders, but otherwise isn't actively physically resisting or threatening the officers, only a  small level of force is justified at that point, which does not include tasing, repeatedly  punching, or slamming somebody onto the ground via their head. There actually was a surprisingly  similar 9inth Circuit case, Rice versus City of Morehouse from 2021, where it was a traffic stop.  The guy refused to provide ID and he had to be extracted from the car. He was passively resisting  by not wanting to be extracted out of the car, though he was not threatening the physical safety  of the officers. Yet, he was tased and slammed to the ground, similar to here. In that case, the  court denied the officers qualified immunity based on their analysis of the Graham factors.  One, the severity of the crime at issue. two, whether there's an immediate safety threat to  anyone, and three, whether the suspect is actively resisting or fleeing. Here was their reasoning.  Factor one, although the suspect refused to cooperate, he didn't yell, use profanity, attempt  to flee, or attempt to harm the officers or reach for any sort of weapon. Therefore, a jury could  find that an officer would not have believed it to be an emergency situation. And absent an  emergency, traffic violation investigations will not support the use of a significant level  of force, even where DUI is suspected. Factor two, a jury could find that the suspect did not present  an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others. During the stop, the officer left  the car's window and reapproached several times, indicating there was no suggestion of the suspect  possibly being armed or dangerous. Additionally, the officer told the other officers there that  she needed assistance because the suspect wouldn't give his license or follow instructions. No  claim was made at that time between the officers at the scene that there was any specific safety  concerns at play other than just non-compliance in a traffic investigation. Again, this was  the reasoning in that other case, Rice versus Morehouse. Then we will compare that to this case.  Factor three. Lastly, a jury could find that the suspect was not actively resisting arrest  or attempting to evade arrest by flight. The court's distinguished between active resistance  and passive resistance. The suspect's refusals to exit his car was considered by the court to  be passive resistance, similar to removing a protester who refuses to stand up. Therefore, the  court held a jury could find that a substantial amount of force being used was unjustified. Again,  that's binding case law now in the Ninth Circuit, which is applicable here. So, let's see if our  case fits within that. Very similar to that case in the other cases I've cited. Although Chris, for  whatever reason, refused or failed to comply with the officer's orders, their directives, he wasn't  being belligerent. He was calm. He was somewhat cooperative. There was no indication that this  was an emergency situation. He was suspected of traffic violations. a possible DUI and that just  does not alone support the use of a significant level of force under the binding case law in that  jurisdiction. Also similar, there's no indication here of any immediate safety threat. The first  officer could have ordered Chris and his passenger out of the car from the very beginning, but he  chose not to, indicating that he didn't perceive any immediate safety threat. He just wanted ID  at that time. He also left the passenger side window to use his radio at one point, indicating  that he didn't have any reason to believe at that time that the suspect was armed or dangerous. And  when the backup officer arrived, he just said, "Get him out of the car." And that the reason  was that they were not identifying. Nothing was mentioned to the other officer as to any potential  immediate safety threat, just non-compliance in a traffic investigation. Also similar, there were no  attempts made by Chris to evade arrest by flight.

[00:23:04]He was somewhat generally cooperative, but he  did grab onto the steering wheel at one point and refuse to get out of the car. And eventually  he did get out of the car after being tased. But then he didn't get on the ground as he was ordered  to. But despite this, he was not attempting to escape the scene. He wasn't trying to fight the  officers. He just wasn't following directions, which the officers mentioned numerous times  to each other and to the suspects during the incident. It could be he didn't understand. It  could be he was drunk. There could be any number of other things that would explain somebody's  failure to follow directions under those circumstances. But this alone, coupled with the  other circumstances, such as being a relatively non-serious non-emergency situation, absent any  actual threats or fighting with the officers, it just does not justify the violent level  of force that was used here. Let me ask you, now that you've seen the full missing five  minutes that led up to the violent use of force that originally went viral on Facebook, does that  change your opinion? Someone was telling me that my audience has just an unbelievable amount  of comments back and forth on every video, just discussing the video. And I think that's very  true. In fact, I always learn something by just scanning through the comments. So, let's discuss  this. There's probably two main camps here. One, he should have complied. He didn't. So f around,  find out. Or two, the cop acted like a bully and the amount of force used was excessive. I'll just  point out that one of those viewpoints is based on your feelings, whoever you are out there. Your  feelings on cops in general, your feelings about this particular guy being arrested. I'm not  saying it's wrong, that feelings are wrong, but I'm saying it's based on your feelings. The  other viewpoint, which I'm arguing for, is based on applying facts objectively to the law, even if  our own personal feelings may go in a different direction. It takes maturity to elevate respect  for the law over just giving into our feelings about people and situations. For those of you in  camp one, let me ask you this. Why can't it be both things? Why can't both things be true? Can't  it both be true that Chris should have complied?

[00:25:18]And it also true that the officer acted like a  bully and used an excessive amount of force. Yes, of course. And the reality is that's the vast  majority of excessive force cases. In almost every one of them, some level of reasonable force  is justified to take the person into custody or to protect the public generally, but they go way  beyond what the law allows. This is not about armchair quarterbacking or judging officers with  2020 hindsight. It's about having standards and enforcing the law. It's not anti- police. That's  pro police, pro- law and order. You've all seen cops like this one. Highly aggressive, heavily  tattooed arms saying things like, "I'm going to you up and motherucker this and motherucker that."  Mother, you can just sort of tell that they seem to get off on using violence. And usually in  circumstances where the victim/suspect is an easy target, in other words, they're a bully. It's  easy to be a bully when you have a badge and a gun and the full weight of the law behind you, as  well as your buddies right there on the scene, also with badges and guns and tasers. In addition  to attracting some people who want to save lives and help their community, that job can also  attract people who are there for the wrong reasons. They want to get in fights, especially  easy fights where all the odds are in their favor, or even in fights where the victim has little  or no ability to even fight back or shield themselves. This is the reason I wanted to show  you this video. You saw how the second officer rolled up onto the scene and within just a  few seconds went straight to violence and he appeared to be enjoying it and then afterwards  they're basically high-fiving each other about it.

[00:27:06]blood.

[00:27:15]This is his blood. Is that  his? Yeah. Are you sure? I think I threw an elbow. I don't know. You good?

[00:27:26]What up, dude? Not [ __ ] man. on you.  So, you know, another day at work. Hey, dude. You trying to dip? Yeah. All right.  All right. I'll move some cars for you.

[00:27:43]Hey, Lieutenant, could you move your car,  please, so this gentleman can leave if you don't mind. Thank you. Thank you, sir.  Oh, these are the two right here. So, then one was in them. That adds up. I  got Thanks, Put those in the sharps, please. What the [ __ ] did I do? Everything  else is a cat for uh bar noise. I have. Okay.

[00:28:12]Lovely day, huh? Thank you, sir. Thank you.  Sheriff, you publicly defended the actions of this officer who grabbed a man by the neck and  then repeatedly punched him in the face within just a few seconds of first meeting him. Sheriff,  is it appropriate for your deputies to threaten to [ __ ] people up? Is that how you expect your  deputies to treat people in your community? Does that represent you well? Sheriff, you support  your deputies completely ignoring binding federal excessive force case law. Failure to ID  and failure to immediately comply with getting out of the car in a traffic investigation, even  a DUI, does not justify a violent beatdown. That is the law. This was not an emergency situation.  There was no immediate safety threat to anyone.

[00:28:58]This was just demonstrating a culture of violence  and a culture of total disregard of constitutional rights that apparently exists in your department.  Things sort of went sideways pretty quickly. Why do you think that happened? He had called in  for backup before I even rolled the window down.

[00:29:14]He had called in somebody um and he told him to  step it up. So on the camera, this dude shows up um also and then he's he's basically trying to  get me out the car and then he hits me in the face and I think that's where it escalated to that  point and I was trying to like I was kind of dazed or whatever, you know, like I got punched a few  times and um it's almost like I didn't have time to respond to anything. I was I was in the process  of talking to the other deputy and at that point like my door opens and then I turn around and I'm  hit in the face, you know, and they're telling me I'm not complying, but they're hitting, you know,  like it's it's a little hard to do when you're tasered and punched to try to follow directions,  especially when you're kind of out of it. I walk up. Thank you for your service. So, I walk I roll  up, I stop, I get out. Trevor's like sitting like this against the passenger window. He's like,  "Driver needs to come out." And I got this guy. I was like, "Okay." So I opened the door.  He's just sitting there. Looks up. I was like, "Get out." He's like, "I'm not getting out."  So I grabbed him and he kept fighting. So I did two just pop right in his face. He kind of  like did this. I took Taser out and I was like pop. Ripped it out. One didn't connect. So I got  another one pop. And then I think that one stuck a little bit cuz he tensed up. So I put that away,  attempted to. And he was hopping out. I didn't see anything on him. So I was like, "Cool." So put  this way, step back, grab gloves. He came at me and I grabbed him and I [ __ ] like I whipped him  and he went far and that's when we got on top and started rolling. But he just wouldn't listen,  dude. And he's he has to be high cuz those tit work now, huh? You have to investigate. No.  No. Yeah. Even if somebody else has to use the force to go size, you guys still claim to use  the force. They drove across the highway. No, I wouldn't either. I'm just going to go over taser  and then dude however many counts besides drunk he's on some cuz those tasers didn't hit dude. No,  they locked him up for a second then he ripped him out. So I'm sitting here passenger. Do you want  to stay up here? You were going to get some food anyways. Pastor keeps looking at me through the  window and then laying back down. You want to stay up here. Dude, the driver seat won't answer.  He finally rolls the window down. Keeps reaching his pocket. So I'm like dude show me your hands.  Wouldn't listen. Like give me the keys. Like man [ __ ] you. I'm like who are you? He's like [ __ ]  you. I'm like that's what you got here. I'm like get him out. I hit him two good solid ones to  the face. Yeah, I tased him a little bit. I got him out and then had to back up a little bit.  Man, you get some food. Huh? I'm looking for I'm following up. Follow him up. All right. Gosh,  man. Never have a decent day in Fernley. Huh?

[00:31:57]Said you can never have a decent day in Fernley.  According to Chris, he did end up taking a plea and he also waited too long to file a civil  lawsuit. So, that is what it is. He has plead guilty to resisting arrest, but on social media,  Nixon claims he was forced to make that plea due to inadequate legal representation. But, it  still happened and now it's out there. Hopefully, the sheriff will clean things up. Though judging  by the tattoos everywhere and even earrings on male police officers in this department, which I  don't think I've ever actually even seen before, I highly doubt that that is going to  happen. But let me know in the comments, what camp are you in here? And also tell me why.  If I hear anything else about this department, I will look into it. And you can follow along by  subscribing both here and at the blog at the civil rightsawyer.com. You can follow me on X as well  as the other platforms at johnbryanesq. Remember, our rights don't end where your fear  begins. Freedom is scary. Deal with it.