Come on. >> No. No. Don't ever touch me again. Get the [ __ ] off. >> We clear? >> Yes, sir. >> And I'll see YOU IN ABOUT 5 MINUTES. >> The once defiant man suddenly calmed down. >> And you ever get disrespectful like I'll start REMOVING YOUR SOUL FROM YOUR BODY. NO. DON'T EVER TOUCH ME AGAIN. GET THE [ __ ] OFF. >> We clear? >> Yes, sir. >> And I'll see you in about 5 minutes. >> And the arrest was completed, but the real trouble started afterwards. About an hour later, he sent a group text to the officers involved. The message suggested that leadership wanted everyone to stop talking about the incident, but his supervisors never approved that message. Poulos also failed to mention the conflict with the female officer. Soon after, he was placed on paid administrative leave. A week later, a captain reviewing body [music] cam footage noticed major discrepancies in Poulos's statement. That's when investigators realized officers had actually clashed at the scene. The female officer initially didn't want to press charges, but once [music] the investigation began, she hired a lawyer and prepared to sue. Three months later, Poulos himself became the subject of a criminal investigation. Poulos insisted he had done nothing wrong. He claimed he thought the female officer was a friend of the suspect and that he simply reacted instinctively [music] to being grabbed. In February 2022, the FBI seized his phone. Investigators discovered that on the very day he became a criminal suspect, Poulos upgraded his phone, wiping all the data. But forensic analysts later recovered part of it, including search histories such as how to influence witnesses, how to recover iPhone data. In July 2022, Poulos turned himself in, but just hours later, he posted bail and walked free. Poulos submitted a one-sentence memo to the sheriff announcing his retirement effective immediately. After 22 years of service, he qualified for full retirement benefits under California law. In December 2023, the jury ruled that prosecutors had not provided enough evidence to He was found not guilty on that charge. So, the question is, was this a justified reaction or a clear abuse of authority? Let me know what you think in the comments.