I am curious about something though: videos very similar to this regularly surface in the media showing cops using what appears to be obviously excessive force against restrained individuals. Whenever this happens, there is often a large chorus defending the cops, using the reasoning that "you weren't there, you don't know what actually happened" and "that short video doesn't tell the whole story". The general idea being that, as bad as it looks, there must have been some justification for it.
Why don't extend the same presumption of (at least "relative") innocence to EMS folks?
Because the approach and mission of cops is different from EMS. Cops are charged with using force to overcome force and those situations escalate and de-escalate in a matter of seconds, generally speaking it is extremely difficult to turn the adrenaline dump switch OFF after it has been rapidly turned ON. Those who have been in those situations can and do testify to that fact, which is why when we see snippets of police violence, it's generally prudent to try to get the whole story or at least attempt to empathize.
EMS, on the other hand, generally shows up after threat has been neutralized, as seemed evident in this situation. Because the adrenaline dump, rapid escalation to utilize force to overcome force doesn't and didn't appear to exist for the EMT in question, what we see is likely entirely generated through emotion on the part of the EMT, someone who has never been trained nor do they have a general duty to utilize force to de-escalate a situation. Attempts to empathize with this situation leaves one with a cognitive dissonance that most can't overcome.
Source - first hand experience as both a cop and a fire-medic in high stress, use of force situations.
