New Witness Testimonies Surface In Kelly Thomas Case: "They Pounded His Face Against the Curb"; "He's Almost Halfway Dead"

Surveillance video from the bus stop near where homeless man Kelly Thomas was beaten into a coma by Fullerton cops was published online yesterday. Security cameras inside an Orange County Transportation Authority bus captured a conversation between witnesses and the bus driver, who apparently reported passenger testimony to his dispatcher. 

"They caught him, pound his face, pound his face against the curb … and they beat him up," said one passenger. "They beat him up, and then all the cops came and they hogtied him, and he was like 'Please God! Please Dad!"

According to the Orange County Register, the community response to Thomas' death is affecting morale across the Fullerton Police Department. "It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant. 

Thomas remained in a coma from July 5 to July 10, when his family took him off life support. The FBI is investigating his death. 

The bus surveillance video: 

 

Comments

[Sparky]

Let me be the first to say it.

FFFFUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Broad Brush]

http://reason.com/blog/2011/08.....nt_2429111

[Almanian]

And Nothing Else Happened?

[Broad Brush]

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Episiarch]

Where are the cop apologists? Oh wait, i think one has already posted in this thread. No stopping them from sucking cop dick, is there.

[Restoras]

Dumbphy will round up all his buddies to troll this thread.

[Proxy]

And make the puppets dance!

[The Real Collective]

Jeez, it's like you can predict the future!

[Montani Semper Liberi]

I posted this video in yesterday's thread, and surprisingly dunphy never responded.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Arguing with dunphy on this is useless, as he only sees it from the incestuous world that exists behing the badge. He will argue what is policy within a department's own guidelines, what use of force is appropriate according to training, and what level of threat the officers were feeling at the time of the incident. He's an us against them type.

People like that can't move outside their own mindset and see something like this as an injustice, no matter what the law allows agents of the state to get away with against its citizens.

[Geppetto]

The alternative is to argue with yourselves. Confirmation bias is no fun. If Dunphy didn't exist, one of you would have to invent him, for the good of the collective.

[fish]

Nobody is arguing! There seems to be broad agreement on this and other threads that the valiant men in blue decided to exact a little home style "Non Judicial" punishment.

All we're doing is feces throwing in an attempt to calm down!

I have two handfuls presently!

[The Collecive]

WE'RE ENTITLED TO OUR OPINIONS!1!!1

[fish]

Okay Collecive if you want to defend the actions of the Fullerton PD by all means do so.

Waiting.....

[The Real Collective]

In anarchy, there is no right or wrong.

[fish]

Then I can stop paying taxes with no repercussions? I am so glad the Real Collective dropped by! You should hang out a while.

[dunphy]

WHO has defended fullerton pd here?

who>?

i have been accused of doing so, but i have never done so

people want to invent the bogeyman, the fullerton PD defender, so they can be more outraged.

kind of like how political ideologues of any stripe need to create a fictional enemy to justify their outrage and increase their statism

[Mensan]

I must defend dunphy on this one. Apart from his deluded belief that tasers are never deadly he is usually very reasonable, and I can't recall a post where he simply tows the police lion.

He's usually very critical of cops who use excessive force. The problem some people on H&R have with him stems from their own (deliberate) misunderstanding of his statements. They conflate his explanation of a particular law or procedure with his endorsement of such even when he specifies that they are not accordant.

[dunphy]

exactly. people here can't distinguish between normative and other arguments.

recall the BART shooting. even balko correctly assessed that involuntary manslaughter was the proper charge. BASED ON THE LAW AS WRITTEN

and 99% of posters here used results not process analysis and concluded the cop should have been convicted of murder

and so it goes...

as for tasers, yes... i don't think tasers are any more likely to result in death than OTHER stressful non-lethal means such as protracted physical struggle and restraint, which is the only other choice absent a taser.

i have presented plenty of evidence of same, but people are always looking for a bogeyman, and taser fits the bill

if tasers were "deadly" then out of the scores of thousands of taser volunteers somebody would have died.

i'm not aware of any high school wrestlers dying recently from wrestling.

add in other factors, and people do sometimes die from wrestling with the cops on the street

the wrestlers in HS are rarely suffering from multiple other symptomslike polydrug use, obesity, etc. like the street arrests

[Coeus]

as for tasers, yes... i don't think tasers are any more likely to result in death than OTHER stressful non-lethal means such as protracted physical struggle and restraint, which is the only other choice absent a taser.
i have presented plenty of evidence of same, but people are always looking for a bogeyman, and taser fits the bill

You've posted a lot of shit, but you have definitely not posted anyting that shows that.

[dunphy]

yes, i have. amongst other things, i have posted evidence that in the aggregate - agencies find that suspect and officer injuries and deaths decrease when tasers are added to officer's use of force arsenal.

restraint associated deaths have been documented as far back as the mid 1800's last i checked. they are not new.

[Coeus]

You claimed that they are no more likely to result in death than any other stessful method of restraint. If that were true, then "excited delirium" deaths would be less after tasers are introduced.

And I looked at that rampantly dishonest paper you posted. They were adding any death in restraint, not the sudden mysterious stopage of the heart which is "excited delirium". They were claiming that "excited delirium" was to blame for everything from decapitation to self-immolation, as long as they were restrained when it happened.

While the small number of "heart attack" deaths listed could fall under this "excited delirium" claim, you'd still have to show that they weren't caused by any other known cause, as a heart attack caused by clogged arteries is vastly more documented than the medically unrecognized cause of "excited delirium".

[dunphy]

then tell you what... lots of people/agencies (amnesty intern. etc.) hate tasers.

out of all these taser haters, there has to be evidence they have gathered right?

so show me studies/etc. that show that agencies that adopt tasers see a statistically significant increase in deaths/injuries after adoption. correlation =/= causation, but at least that would be something. the stuff i have read shows the exact oppsoite - injuries and deaths, on average, go DOWN

[Coeus]

so show me studies/etc. that show that agencies that adopt tasers see a statistically significant increase in deaths/injuries after adoption.

You're the one who made the claim I just refuted. The burden of proof falls to you. I consistently pick apart your cites, show you how they don't apply and/or are straight up lies, and then you move the goalposts and say it's up to me to prove this new argument wrong? Without ever acknowledging that you just got schooled?

This new argument of yours:
at least that would be something. the stuff i have read shows the exact oppsoite - injuries and deaths, on average, go DOWN
has no relation to your previous arguments.

If you let word out that the police could kill you without reprisal or justification, you'd probably see a lot less injuries and deaths associated with police interactions. That also has nothing to do with your claims. You consistently claim that tasers don't kill anyone, and that they're no more dangerous than other methods of restraint. You haven't proved either claim, while I've given cite after cite showing the opposite.

Every time you've requested a cite, I've provided one, which you then promptly ignored. The one time I failed to find one, I admitted it and never made that argument again. You show no such honesty in your postings.

In fact, I'm still waiting for a single autopsy report which lists "excited delirium" as a cause of death where the authorities weren't involved (i.e. prison guards, cops, feds, etc).

[dunphy]

you didn't refute jackshit.

again, show ME some fucking studies.

i'm the one always defending tasers here.

they are in use nationwide.

so show ME some fucking actual studies that show that agencies that adopt tasers see an increase in deaths and injuries.

bring it on.

ALL the evidence i have seen points in the opposite direction

if it's so fucking obvious how dangerous they are, then out of ALL these anti-taser groups, etc. there should be plenty o' evidence compiled

bring it

[dunphy]

and the fact that tasers are IN use in tons of agencies and accepted in practice, etc. and that lawsuits against taser almost always lose - the DEFAULT position is that they are safe.

the burden is on YOU to prove otherwise.

all you do is wank. provide some studies

[Coeus]

dunphy:as for tasers, yes... i don't think tasers are any more likely to result in death than OTHER stressful non-lethal means such as protracted physical struggle and restraint, which is the only other choice absent a taser.
i have presented plenty of evidence of same, but people are always looking for a bogeyman, and taser fits the bill

To which I said:
You've posted a lot of shit, but you have definitely not posted anyting that shows that.

you replied:
yes, i have. amongst other things, i have posted evidence that in the aggregate - agencies find that suspect and officer injuries and deaths decrease when tasers are added to officer's use of force arsenal.

I pointed out that this has nothing to do with what you had just claimed.

you also said:
restraint associated deaths have been documented as far back as the mid 1800's last i checked. they are not new.

I then explained what I had found when I read your self-servingly dishonest cites, and why they didn't actually prove anything at all regarding "excited delirium". I also explained this when you first posted them, yet you still brought it up here.

you didn't refute jackshit.

and apparently you don't know what "refute" means.

Then you say this "so show ME some fucking actual studies that show that agencies that adopt tasers see an increase in deaths and injuries."

You are asking me to prove a claim I never made. My claims (unlike your's) regarding tasers have been consistent.

1)Tasers can kill. Since they kill with electricity, it's called electrocution.

2)Since police are unwilling or unable to admit that they can kill, they shouldn't be allowed to use them.

I have explanations why this mindset of police is bad vis-a-vis tasers, but have never posted them, since you invariably pull me into an argument about the word electrocution or that guy who stopped breathing when you cuffed him any time I start. If you're curious, my reasoning is as follows:

If you don't believe that they can kill, then the bar is much lower on when you use them. The guy looked at you "funny" can be a candidate for a taser but not a gun. He's no where near as likely to die, but the possibility is there. I'm sure they do reduce the harm that comes to police and criminals when apprehending violent ones. That doesn't outweigh the fact that people are now vunerable to death for simply not showing the proper deference to authority. I don't care if it makes a cops job easier, if it increases, in any amount, my chances of dying for not kissing enough ass.

hth

[Mensan]

Is this recent enough?

[Coeus]

Is this recent enough?

In what way does that show that any stressful method of restraint is as likely to cause death as a taser?

[Mensan]

It was a response to dunphy

dunphy|8.2.11 @ 4:11PM|#
... i'm not aware of any high school wrestlers dying recently from wrestling.

[dunphy]

cool!

[Coeus]

It was a response to dunphy

Mi Culpa

[dunphy]

it's mea culpa

[Coeus]

it's mea culpa

Mi Culpa

[malissa yocum]

you are wrong. a young man (mentally ill) was tazered in philadelphia a couple months ago and he died.

[dunphy]

who is wrong?

[Commentariat/Mob]

WE'RE ENTITLED TO OUR OPINIONS!!1!

[Gentle Ben]

I'm generally pro-police, because I think violent criminals cause more harm to citizens, than the men in blue entrusted to stop them. I acknowledge my bias. I also acknowledge that in many less -developed countries, the Police are corrupt and brutal.

Here, though, I must salute you guys. Beating a homeless man to death by 4-6 armed policemen cannot justified, unless the fellow was shooting at them. Any evidence of that? Terrible, terrible misconduct. Subpoenas and indictments should issue, and the FullertonPolice should not CLose ranks to support these guys, unless they can articulate a convincing justification for this extreme, brutal conduct.

[Fist of Etiquette]

If you're not connected, your first interaction with an entitled LEO having a bad day will probably change that bias.

[alan]

I'm generally pro-police, because I think violent criminals cause more harm to citizens, than the men in blue entrusted to stop them. I acknowledge my bias.

I know citizens who have no arrest record, who pay exorbitant taxes, and who refuse to do their duty of being vigilantly armed in public for they prefer not to be harassed by the boys in blue who administer extra constitutional laws. I'm one of them, and there are many of us. You are less safe because of this fact, not more.

[dunphy]

no, i'm not. unlike you, i simply don't argue from ignorance.

this video is very compelling.

like i said already, it looks bad.

now, it looks worse

[Citizen dunphy]

This calls for two-week suspensions!

[Tacos mmm...]

Maybe even a couple months paid leave.

[dunphy]

yawn... with the strawmen. if the evidence supports murder, charge them with murder.

have i ever said anything different? nope.

[hmm]

If you call enough people ignorant you may start to appear like an intellectual. Keep it up buddy!!

[dunphy]

hmm, i call ignorance where i see it. in your case, it's a pleasant mixture of ignorance and arrogance. i appreciate it

[Joshua Corning]

All you jerks were right about jumping to conclusions when heaps of compelling evidence was given to you...So it is you who is ignorant and arrogant not ace detective dunphy.

derpy derp derp

[dunphy]

derka derka!

[Commentariat/Mob]

Doowah, doowah!

[dunphy]

bullshit., i've argued any # of police use of forces were injustices

is ALL you have lies? is that it?

[Commentariat/Mob]

Um...yes.

[Tulpa]

Uh, dunphy has already stated multiple times that if the story is as presented here the cops should be prosecuted. He just said he wanted to wait for more reliable details to come out.

[Lynch Mob]

Too bad! Justice NOW!

[Bart Simpson]

Sorry Mom, the mob has spoken....

[Montani Semper Liberi]

And now we have more reliable details thanks to these eye witnesses.

[robc]

You arrest, then investigate, then decide whether or not to prosecute.

At least that is how it would happen if you or I did this.

That is where dumphy is wrong. He doesnt want the cops arrested first.

[Tulpa]

You need evidence to arrest someone too. Or do you think habeas corpus doesn't apply to cops.

[robc]

They have as much evidence as they would have if we beat a guy to death with witnesses around.

We would have been in jail within 24 hours.

We might be out on bond, and that would be okay for the cops too.

[Night Elf Mohawk]

You mean like people saying they were bashing the guy's head into a curb?

[Shari'ah Moore]

I would think his injuries provided some pretty damning evidence.

[dunphy]

robc, just wants his pound of flesh. it's always about I WANT THE COPS ARRESTED.

it's never about "i want an investigation to find out what happened"

let the investigation continue and when they have strong evidence, (assuming that happens, and it looks like they can get it), then arrest and charge the cops

[Fist of Etiquette]

You're waiting for the conclusion of an official investigation. For a lot of us, there's a suspicion of law enforcement investigating itself. Lack of adequate accountability breeds abuse, like what is pretty well citizen documented to have been the case here. I think that's a big reason for the gap between us.

[dunphy]

i don't hold that suspicion and i've explained why.

among other reasons, there are multiple investigations going on, including the FBI. and if you think the frigging FBI gives favoritism to local cops, you are living in a dream world.

also, i know from numerous investigations just in my own dept. that they are more than willing to find the cops in the wrong, even when after judicial and arbitrator review, it turns out the cop was right and the dept. wrong.

i realize that's the reason meme that cops always protect their own. it's horseshit.

i've also given numerous examples of officers testifying against other officers and even turning them in to start the initial investigation e.g. paul schene

[Night Elf Mohawk]

I'm sure if 5 civilians did this to a cop the investigation would be continuing apace while the guys went about their lives, too.

[dunphy]

which is of course disanalogous because this was a case of cops making a terry stop of a suspected criminal, not just some "civilians" walking up and beating a cop.

this meme is so tired and overused.

and again, i hope they are prosecuted for whatever the evidence supports

[Fist of Etiquette]

This is where the gap exists. You're talking "Terry Stops" and we're talking about an obvious homicide.

Rather than just gather video evidence, if the witnesses had stepped in to defend the guy, Thomas' life might be saved but the witnesses/interlopers would definitely be in jail. I know you refuse to talk about what-ifs, but the fact that during murder by state agents, citizens have no practical realtime self-defense under the law is what generates much fear and contempt.

You put yourself in shoes of law enforcement, others here put ourselves in the shoes of the victim or his family. There's an empathy gap. I can understand how you would trust a system under which you have greater control. You don't understand why I can't trust it.

[dunphy]

i don't "trust " the system to the extent i know that some innocent men get convicted and a metric assload of guilty go free. i am saying that rule of law is a good thing, and our system is amongst the best in the world (WOD POLICY aside)

i put myself in the shoes of prosecutors, cops, defense attorneys, witnesses, and the man who was beaten to death

i want JUSTICE.

i don't want rush to judgment

[torsten husvedt]

A terry stop of a suspected criminal that settles it then. Seriously though people are not suspected of being criminals they are suspected of having committed crimes...big difference!

[me/dwc]

Hey, I want the cops arrested to. I want them held, at a minimum, to the same standard of conduct that the people whose taxes pay their salaries are held to. I want them not to be above the law. I want them to recognize that they are supposed to be public servants and employees of the public and not enforcers meting out their own particular brands of justice. Just exactly how many isolated incidents does it take for police conduct to be an issue for anyone with any sense of decency? Anyone who does not see that police routinely receive special consideration with respect to their conduct is just dishonest, at least with themselves. When showing insufficient deference to a cop is no longer considered justification for physical violence against citizens, then I will consider having some respect again for law enforcement.

[dunphy]

again, and in many cases cops receive harsher penalties and a double standard AGAINST them not for them. but as is the typical reason-meme, you only see one side.

[Amakudari]

You need evidence to arrest someone too. Or do you think habeas corpus doesn't apply to cops.

You mean like a dead guy, eyewitness testimony and a video record from an incident that happened four weeks ago?

[Fist of Etiquette]

Personally, I enjoy reading dunphy's take on these things. He imparts good information on how police think and how procedurally individual incidents are dealt with. It's not that he's a blue wall of silence type, it's just that he can't seem to move outside of a mindset, like most people who are their job, so arguments end up becoming very circular.

[Tulpa]

It's good that you're unbiased and free of any mindset boundaries.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Yeah, that's me. I won't shut up about how I have no set point of view.

[Bee Tagger]

Yes, to identify someone else's biases or mindset boundaries one must be completely free of biases and mindset boundaries, first.

[Citizen Nothing]

Sadly, I think dunphy is probably the best of the lot. It wasn't always that way. I'm proud that my dad is a retired city cop -- a good cop, I think. He worked some pretty rough city neighborhoods for 25 years and never fired his gun on duty.
Even he is disgusted with the current state of law / law enforcement.

[omg]

Yeah, to get a look at how bad things can really get, the blog reason initially linked to when they first posted this story had 2 cops in a dick measuring contest comparing how outrageous situation were that they still considered legitimate ("I support my fellow officer who shot an unarmed man in the back!"..."I support my fellow officer who beat up a housewife!")

[dunphy]

good for your dad. and fwiw, firing a gun in the line of duty doesn't make you any less of a good cop. it just makes you lucky you never had to.

i stand by my record too. the only citations i have received have been for bravery

[Tulpa]

the only citations i have received have been for bravery

Me too. Well, bravery in the form of doing 80 in a 50 right in front of an Ohio trooper on I480.

[Tulpa]

Sorry, that was 80 in a 60. I'm not THAT brave.

[dunphy]

brave would be asking him if he goes faster when he's on his way to get doughnuts to feed his fat gut

🙂

[Citizen Nothing]

I'd argue that the better a cop is, the fewer times he has to fire his gun.

Also: and 99% of posters here... blah blah blah

Remember this the next time dunphy accuses us H&R civilians of hyperbole.

[dunphy]

but the fact is that generally speaking it's a matter of luck, if you get put in a situation where you have to

there are also situations where not firing is a bad idea.

heck, i had one situation where i was shot at by a gangbanging fuckhead. it was in a bar and i didn't have a clear shot, so i didn't

i have ZERO doubt other people are dead or injured because he's still free and out there. if i had shot him, that wouldn't be the case

but i didn't have a clear shot and i wasn't going to risk innocents. so, he got away

[Bobster0]

Link to the story?

[Fred]

All of this wait and see shit sounds reasonable until you realize that an ordinary citizen would be in jail waiting on a murder indictment.

[sloopyinca]

Yeah, I can't get past the guy put in jail for the Dodger Stadium beating with no evidence whatsoever. There is a ton of eyewitness testimony on this one, yet there has been silence from the DA's office.

[cynical]

Yes, but cop-prosecuted, so they'll be charged with special cop crimes like "being kind of a dick" as opposed to the sort of charges that you or I would get in such a case, like "capital murder".

[Sy]

^^FUCKIN' THIS^^^

[Sy]

I tried arguing this point with dunphy last night, but of course got nowhere after banging my head on the keyboard after an hour.

[dunphy]

because it's horseshit and i explained why.

heck, often the reason cops get OFF without conviction is the prosecutors OVERCHARGE them.

that's what happened in amadou diallo case.

and many many others.

again the reality is often the exact opposite of what you claim

[It Has To Be said]

RELEASE THE BALKOBOTS!1!

[robc]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.

If you arrested your co-workers who murdered people, it would stop happening.

[Almanian]

jinx!

[Fred]

THIS

[The Pist]

As a father of someone who has cognitive issues, this incident is filling me with RAGE.

[Sudden]

Got a brother with severe autism and retardation... if they murdered him in this fashion, well, I doubt I'd have the same degree of restraint as this guy's father. Almighty retribution would be swift, albeit with maximum suffering inflicted.

[fish]

Got a brother with severe autism and retardation...

And they seem to get the absolute worst of it during the interactions! This guy...the guy who has an epileptic seizure who gets tased to death etc.

You would think that a police department might accidentally hire a cop with some observational skills.

[dunphy]

ever deal with a schizoprenic in an arrest situation?

they can be volatile as fuck. i had one kick out my window and also attack a female officer (he didn't like women). in fact, that's why he committed the arson i arrested him for in the first place.

MOST schizos are not violent. the ones that are, are scary as fuck

[Trooper Jones]

So why didn't you shoot him? Officer safety is rule number one!

Unfair comment? Yes, it is. Tough.

[dunphy]

i didn't shoot him because it would have been neither justified, wise, or necessary.

it's not an unfair comment. it's a stupid comment

[Lord Humungus]

agreed.

[Art-P.O.G.]

To be fair, we don't often read about good police work, we read about it when they fuck up or commit serious misconduct.

[Kristen]

No shit....because "good police work" = doing their fucking jobs. I don't make the news when I show up and get my word done right, why should police?

[dunphy]

no, good police work often means going far beyond "their job" and often involves risking their lives to help others... or paying the ultimate sacrifice.

another officer and i pulled a bunch of people from a burning building and suffered pretty bad smoke inhalation injury because of it.

there wasn't even a newspaper STORY, let alone a mention in reason. even extraordinary heroism rarely makes the paper .

this guy paid the price for his heroism...

DOUGLAS, Wyo. ? A Wyoming lawman who died last week trying to rescue a girl from a swollen river made the selfless decision to risk his own life, his supervisors said Monday.

Searchers found the body of Converse County Sheriff's Deputy Bryan Gross on Sunday morning about 1.5 miles downstream from where he entered the North Platte River.

Related Article:

Deputy missing after search for girl in Wyo. river
Related content sponsored by:

Gross was one of several rescuers who went into the river after the girl on Thursday evening, in the eastern Wyoming town of Douglas.

Other rescuers using a canoe steered the girl to the bank and she later was treated at a local hospital. Officials say she wasn't injured.

Sheriff Clinton B. Becker told reporters Monday that Gross' actions went beyond the call of duty.

"He made a decision to do what he did, and he did it to the best of his ability," Becker said. He said Gross was one of 14 patrol officers in the department.

Becker and others in law enforcement have been mum about why the girl was in the river. However, Douglas City Administrator Steve Henning said last week that the girl, who he said was 14 years old, had jumped into the river after becoming distraught over her boyfriend.

Gross, who grew up in Michigan, had worked as a Douglas police officer for a few years before recently joining the sheriff's department. Becker said Gross worked as a drug officer and handled a trained dog named Gus.

Henning said Gross had gotten married within the past month or so to a woman who had worked as a receptionist for the city.

Becker said neighboring Natrona County Sheriff's Office is investigating the incident and will have a report completed in coming weeks. He said he doesn't expect any criminal charges, but said the investigation will document what happened.

Gross' death has hit people in Douglas, a city of about 6,000 people 50 miles east of Casper.

"It's just tragic," said Jim Young, proprietor of the City Shoe and Saddle Shop on North Second Street who said he knew Gross.

"I guess he did what he needed to do," Young said of the young lawman's decision to enter the river, which has been running high with runoff from snow-packed mountains.

Undersheriff Don Schoenleber said searchers from several agencies had searched 24 miles of the North Platte before Gross' body was found.

Becker said the department will consider issuing life preservers for deputies to carry in their patrol vehicles. "We don't do a whole lot of our work by the river ? 95 percent of our work is out on the prairie," he said. "But on occasion such as this incident, you just never know."

Funeral services for Gross are scheduled for Saturday at the local high school.

[Crackers Boy]

Just remember... for every policeman who dies in the line of duty, SIX "civilians" were killed being arrested.

CB

[dunphy]

and in the VAST majority of time, THEIR death is justified and brought on entirely by their actions...

this case (Assuming the woman dies) is a perfect example...

THAT's the difference. the vast majority of homicides by cop are obviously justified... a tiny percentage are not

http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ethru.html

[Crackers Boy]

"THAT's the difference. the vast majority of homicides by cop are obviously justified... a tiny percentage are not"

Wow. Obviously. Just wow.

CB

[dunphy]

yes. obviously

[Trooper Jones]

Notice, no remorse or pity for the people he is supposed to serve and protect.

He's a warrior, dammit!

[dunphy]

which people. i have sadness for all deaths, even clemons...

but clemons' death was justified. i'll have remorse for his victims, cop and non-cop

[Joshua Corning]

A Wyoming lawman who died last week trying to rescue a girl from a swollen river

Non-cops die trying to save other people all the time.

Why do cops get to go free after they murder someone but non-cops don't?

[dunphy]

it's up to juries.

juries let oj go free after murdering.

i am sure there have been cases where they have let cops go free too.

but ime when there is PC to believe cops commit murder, they are charged and tried just like everybody else.

iow, your premise is wrong

[Sy]

They're paid for that "good work". In most other professions, "bad work" will get you fired. "Good work" is rewarded through promotions and keeping your fucking job. Expecting some puff piece in the local news every time you do your job correctly is absurd.

[dunphy]

actually, no. cops aren't incentivized to do that "good work" (speaking of heroic stuff or going beyond the call, etc.)

in fact, there's rarely incentive to do so, and often DISincentive.

in private industry, people who do extraordinary work can be given bonuses, promotion, etc. in police work, generally not so. promotion is purely by civil service shit, and no union will ever allow police to be paid a bonus for good work.

the officers who do extraordinary work often do so with little or no recognition, sometimes even scorn by their civil service mentality coworkers, and with often great risk to their safety.

so, the situations with non-cops are disanalogous. we can't get pay bonuses or promotions for it

[Crackers Boy]

Decertify the union.

Problem solved.

CB

[dunphy]

lol. riiiight

[Coeus]

so, the situations with non-cops are disanalogous. we can't get pay bonuses or promotions for it

I pulled a guy off of a freeway off-ramp a few months ago. It didn't make the paper, and I didn't get a citation for bravery. I have no problem with this. I don't feel entitled to it. If I had beat him to death on the side of the highway, it would definitely have made the paper. And there is nothing unfair about that.

If anything, cops get more recognition than most. And all they do is bitch about how they never get enough (go read policeone.com for a while and you'll see what I'm talking about).

(On as side note, it was also one of the few times that I interacted with cops where they didn't act like total dicks)

[dunphy]

that wasn't in the course of your employ

my point is that when you work for (for example) MSFT and you go beyond the call you very well may get pay incentive, etc.

you CAN"T get that when you are a public servant.

i risked my life and got smoke inhalation injury for my trouble. no mention in the paper, but who cares? i saved people's lives.

but that kind of shit happens all the time and you almost never read about it, let alone in reason

[Coeus]

i risked my life and got smoke inhalation injury for my trouble. no mention in the paper, but who cares? i saved people's lives.

You obviously do, you've mentioned it dozens of times in this year alone. We get it. The citation wasn't enough.

but that kind of shit happens all the time and you almost never read about it, let alone in reason

Is this a spoof? Is it possible that you're dumb enough to bitch about cops not getting enough recognition in a respones to my comment saying that even though they get more than the average citizen, they still bitch about it?

[dunphy]

btw, thank you for helping and at least where *i* work, we give out awards yearly to both cops AND non-cops for heroism, etc.

[Almanian]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.

Oh, sad face for you, Sergeant 🙁

We can't have low morale adversely impacting the Police "Service's" duty to protect! And "serve"!

Round up those people in front of the station, smash their faces against the curb, and get that morale up!

[Bronwyn]

Poor widdle sergeant. Should we send him flowers with a note that says "Sorry your colleagues are murdering thugs"?

[Geppetto]

That would be a start.

[wylie]

I really like this idea. Order like 10k bouquet deliveries to the station, with thinly veiled "condolences".

[wylie]

...."condolences" on the cards.

finished-tfm.

[Bronwyn]

Would FTD add poison oak to the bouquets, do you think?

[fish]

TERRORIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[wylie]

Would FTD add poison oak to the bouquets, do you think?

I wouldn't ask the folks at FTD to risk themselves like that. Now....if they wanted to do it voluntarily...

[Police]

We're not the ones who took him off of life support, so it wasn't we that killed him.

[cynical]

No, it would be, "you belong to and willingly help bankroll an organization that defends murderers and criminals and shields them from accountability, so you deserve to be shouted at."

[Tulpa]

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

[R C Dean]

Good one.

[aeronathan]

Well you know what will keep people from calling you murderers?

Not murdering people is top of the list....

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.
I'm sure getting hit with a maglite is pretty far removed from a trip to Cabo San Lucas when measured on the "pleasantness" scale.

[JMW]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.

Well, when you lie down with scummy, murdering dogs...

I'd feel for you, FPD, if I had no heart like you don't.

[Fist of Etiquette]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.

It's less pleasant seeing the people who murdered your loved one unrepentant and unpunished.

[Chief Wiggum]

Fat Tony is a cancer on this fair city! He is the cancer and I am the...uh...what cures cancer?

[Gibby]

Killing the bad cells.

[fish]

According to the Orange County Register, the community response to Thomas' death is affecting morale across the Fullerton Police Department. "It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.

Goddammit.....I expect a pleasant and non-threatening work environment....and if I don't get I'm going to curb stomp some little retarded kid who can't fight back.

[lIB'tARIAN]

wHY WON'T aNYONE TAKE uS sERIOUSLY?

[The Theoretician]

Copsucker

[lIB'tARIAN]

HAHAHAHAHA!

[Restoras]

This is an unbeleivable, unacceptable, inhuman outrage. The cops that did this went so far beyond the pale that their is no difference between them and any SS camp guard or einsatzgruppe. Eye for an eye - they should be beaten to death with their own flashlights.

[Sarcasm]

I am so adding that to my collection.

[dumbfuckphy]

you are jumping to conclusions that these guys acted inproperly, all the facts aren't in yet, and we have to see if they were justified or not once we get the full story

[Your Teacher]

C-

[dunphy]

troll-o-meter:.02

[Mad Scientist]

I was listening to the JOhn and Ken show yesterday on KFI. They've been following this pretty closely for the last few days. Apparently the Fullerton PD chief took away the force's Maglites because of past incidents of them being used to wallop people in the head. The story goes that the police had to resort to using the butts of their tazers to cave in Kelley Thomas' face.

[hmm]

Call a turd a turd and a murderer a murderer. It could always be worse officer, citizens could start resisting your authority with a force continuum equal to your own. Seems like many officers and departments are doing their damnedest to push things to that point.

[Proxy]

varados|8.1.11 @ 5:21PM|#
In a different age, and in a different part of the world, the individual policemen, their wives, children and assorted relatives would have been hacked to death, dismembered, and dragged to a promontory by this man's family, where wolves and vultures would have performed a clean up. What a shame we don't live in that age.

[STEVE SMITH]

KILL THE CHILDREN? WHAT A WASTE OF RAPEABLE OBJECTS!

[hmm]

Count me as kinda glad we don't live in that age or part of the world. At least not yet.

[Geppetto]

For the good of the collective, I'm going to have to ask you to leave.

[michael]

In the bus surveillance cam, a couple of riders mentioned seeing others with video cameras filming the attack.....Where are those videos?

[Paranoid]

The cops stole them!

[Tulpa]

They shut off because no one was moving.

[cynical]

lawlz

[wylie]

Couldn't be that people are afraid to come forward with that evidence?

[sarcasmic]

Who would you give the evidence to?

The media? The FBI? Does the family have an attorney?

[The Media]

I'll take ten copies. We live on this stuff!

[michael]

I'd send it to Radley Balko...he'd know what to do.

[Gandalf]

Unless he's really Saruman!

[Your Teacher]

I thought Riggs was the new Balko.

[dunphy]

he;s more histrionic than balko. his comments on the taser rifle in his "article" were a good example

[Paranoid]

Sounds good to me.

[sage]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.

Well gee, you're a fucking cop. I really wouldn't want you to experience any unpleasantness, now would I? We don't pay you for that crap, do we? Fuck this guy right in his pork neck!

[toddb]

I'm starting to think these cops may actually be screwed. There are just too many witnesses, video, audio, etc. and no plausible story that they can make up to justify the level of violence.

These cops may have to "take one for the team" to attempt to maintain the illusion that people are protected from the application of abusive power by the state. After all, the system does have an incentive to keep the sheep from getting too nervous...

[fish]

Looks like Volusia County has decided to stand up to Mr. Isolated Incident.

Oak Hill eliminates police department

Updated: Tuesday, 02 Aug 2011, 10:28 AM EDT
Published : Tuesday, 02 Aug 2011, 6:25 AM EDT

VOLUSIA COUNTY, Fla. (WOFL FOX 35) - In a surprise move Monday night the city of Oak Hill eliminated its entire police department.

The police chief and a few officers were under scrutiny for alleged illegal and odd behavior. The city council was so fed up they simply wiped out the entire department.

What can Fullerton learn from this incident.....?

[Sudden]

Nailed it there. If these guys did this in a more well-concealed environ, free from pesky witnesses and youtubers, they'd be enjoying laughs and shitty American style lagers at the local cop bar.

I'd love to see Dexter take out an abusive cop in this coming season.

[cynical]

I'd love to see him take out six. If only for the challenge of it.

[jasno]

"shitty American style lagers"

Yeah, if they only drank the over-hopped, estrogenic fag beers... maybe it would take the edge off their roid-rage...

[sarcasmic]

"to attempt to maintain the illusion that people are protected from the application of abusive power by the state"

But that would require first admitting that the state may abuse its power.
It is more important to deny that such incidents can occur.

[me/dwc]

By screwed I assume you mean, may actually have to suffer the consequences of their actions like an ordinary person would.

[Episiarch]

Wow, this incident seems to have driven our resident stalker cop-sucking troll retard out of her mind. Good. Well, what's left of her mind, that is.

[sage]

resident stalker cop-sucking troll retard

Is there only one? Holy shit, it's keeping busy.

[Episiarch]

It's an obsessive retard on disability for being fatter than Mindy Cohn with more time than any normal human. Of course it keeps busy. It's insane.

[sage]

And I'm guessing with that girth it doesn't move away from the keyboard too much. And the question that naturally follows is: how does it go to the bathroom then? Answer: lots of Depends taped together. And a health worker comes once a month or so and changes them out.

[Episiarch]

I figured she just lived in a literal pigsty. Then she can shit directly on the floor, and be fed from a trough. It's all win from her perspective.

[fish]

Maybe if she shits in the trough......

[Sudden]

At least Sandi always found new and inventive areas to shit.

[Sandi]

Our world is a beautiful, wonderous place!

[Restoras]

Maybe just a catheter and a bag that gets emptied once a day by a taxpayer funded nurse?

[sage]

Approve the debt ceiling or this shitbag will explode!

[Episiarch]

Is that supposed to be some kind of incentive?

[sage]

To the other rowhouse tenants, uh yeah.

"Yeah, she stinks. Like warm garbage. But at least it's tolerable. If someone doesn't come along once in a while to empty that thing it gets really bad."

[fish]

[fish]

I'm sure I had something important to say one post up!

[Comedy Gold]

HAHAHAHAHA!

[fish]

Thanks! I'm here all week!

[Geppetto]

C-

[Michael]

I don't understand all the fuss. Was this guy a rocket scientist or something?

[Geppetto]

B+

[Virginia]

yeah, but he worked for NASA so discount his potential worth.

[fish]

yeah, but he worked for NASA so discount his potential worth.

Why?

The NASA mission has changed from that of space science and engineering to muslim community outreach!

I think a comatose beating victim could pull it off.

[sarcasmic]

Would this happen if the right to keep and bear arms had not been infringed?

[wylie]

Kelley would probably still be dead. Those cops would probably be in jail now, thanks to all those bystanders performing some Citizen's Arrest duties.

[sarcasmic]

I don't know. Getting the hairy eyeball from a crowd of armed bystanders may have cut the beating short.
More likely the police knowing that they aren't the only ones who are armed may have prevented the beating from occurring.

Knowing that anyone else who is armed either got permission from the police (so they're not likely to interfere with police business) or in violation of the law (again not likely to interfere) the cops know that they can do anything they want and nobody will attempt to stop them.

That is the definition of a police state.

[R C Dean]

What an interesting scenario. A bystander is entitled to use lethal force in order to protect someone else.

If you had been carrying a weapon and came on this scene, would you have pulled it on the cops? Started shooting the cops? What if it was only one or two, so you had a decent chance of dropping them before you were shot?

It strikes me as an open and shut case of legitimate self-defense.

[Tulpa]

That's a dicey situation. Cops are (and have to be) permitted to initiate force in the course of their legitimate duties, so the ordinary self-defense rules don't apply -- you aren't even entitled to defend yourself against the use of any and all force, let alone someone else. You'd be taking a serious gamble on whether (a) they were not exercising their duties legitimately at the time, or (b) they were using excessive force. [and of course this is assuming we're in the fantasy world where you can shoot a cop under any circumstance and not be prosecuted]

[robc]

KY's law on using deadly force to protect yourself requires (amongst other things) for you to be right.

When defending yourself, the standard is looser. But defending someone else, you have to do the proper calculations and you better be correct.

So definately a dicey situation.

[Tulpa]

Yeah, I'd imagine the standard for actions being "reasonable" goes down when you're being attacked.

[robc]

I miswrote the hell out of that. First sentence should be "to protect someone else".

Rest is okay.

[sarcasmic]

Didn't the Supreme Court recently rule that even if the police are doing something illegal, you can only question their actions later in court (provided you've got the coin to initiate legal action)?

[Kelly Thomas]

even if the police are doing something illegal, you can only question their actions later in court

Going to be pretty tough to do in my case.

[Nipplemancer]

that was Indiana's Supreme Ct, not SCOTUS

[jasno]

Give it time...

[Tulpa]

That's usually good advice unless the actions are blatantly illegal under any circumstance and you have proof of the blatantly illegal stuff occuring that they can't confiscate. I don't know if SCOTUS has ruled on the question though.

[Mensan]

They did about 100 years ago, and as far as I know they haven't reversed themselves. They ruled that police attempting an illegal arrest are committing an assault, and resisting arrest in that case is lawful self-defense.

[sarcasmic]

As I said in an above comment, if the cops knew that anyone might be armed, perhaps they might not resort to violence at every available opportunity.

The reason police are able to be contemptuous pricks is precisely because the citizenry has been disarmed.

"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them"
-George Mason

We must obey our public servants or risk having violence initiated against us.

Think about it.

[IceTrey]

It's actually legal to open carry in California. As long has the weapon is not loaded that is.

[Tulpa]

I was walking on Forbes Ave in Pittsburgh the other day right behind a guy with what looked like an AK-47 slung over his back. I assume it was a replica (though it looked very realistic) and that he was with the Batman movie filming down the street, but I don't believe you're allowed to open carry on public streets in Pgh. PA's gun laws aren't quite that lax.

[IceTrey]

I believe in Pennsylvania the law is that you can open carry outside the large cities without a permit and in the cities with a permit. This guy was carrying in Philly and had a run in with cops who didn't even know what the laws were.

http://www.copblock.org/2187/m.....-carrying/

[robc]

KY doesnt carry about load.

Although the cops in Louisville, Lexington and Covington are known to harass open carriers.

[sarcasmic]

If open carry is legal, but guaranteed to result in police harassment, is it really legal?

[robc]

Good question. Isnt guaranteed to lead to harassment, just more likely in those cities.

Also could lead to sweet civil rights paydays.

[sarcasmic]

Where I live the right to bear arms "shall not be questioned" according to the state constitution, and exercising that right is guaranteed to result in being questioned (disarmed, run for warrants, searched, searched again, charged with "disorderly conduct" or "disturbing the peace", detained, released, having the charges dropped, and being warned to never ever exercise that right again).

[Gibby]

There is one thing that could have pevented this. Keeping Schizophrenics off the streets. But of course that would be denying him his freedom.

[Tulpa]

At least don't feed them in the parks.

[cynical]

Then the cops would just beat a sane guy to death.

[cynical]

Maybe? But consider Kitty Genovese. All those people had to do was pick up a phone, and they still did nothing.

And there were six cops. Before taking them on, you'd need at least a similar number of armed citizens who agreed that action needed to be taken. Not an easy thing to do.

[Mike M.]

Best as I can tell from searching, the vaunted New York Times, the uber-liberal "paper of record", hasn't written a single article about this story.

I wonder why that is, because I find it pretty remarkable. Is it because it happened in southern California instead of somewhere in the deep south, because Kelly Thomas was just a white guy, or both?

[The NY Times]

Well until somebody important gets involved we really have no comment. What are the health care program implications?

[The NY Times]

Tell you what: get us enough cases like this one to make it statistically significant and we'll print 'em all. Deal?

[wylie]

What are the health care program implications?

Think of all the healthcare resources wasted on people who are illegally made comatose. Good enough?

[The NY Times]

Think of all the healthcare resources wasted on people who are illegally made comatose. Good enough?

Oh my....isn't that why we have those death panels...you know...for when things happen to the hoi polloi?

[Restoras]

Well, more and more cops are more of a unionized group of agents for the state, so ne need to shed any light on a subject that might throw thier loyalty to to state in question.

[Tulpa]

They didn't write anything about the black grandfather in Jacksonville who got shot because he told undercover cops posing as drug dealers to get off his property. Relegated the Kathryn Johnston story to a couple inches in the back of the front section too.

So there are some topics on which minorities and women are not hardest hit, apparently.

[Au H20]

Dude, the NY Times is still trying to figure out how it can avoid reporting on Fast and Furious while still hammering the Murdoch thing! Do you really believe that they have the energy to avoid covering two stories about the failure of the state at the same time?

[Reformed Republican]

They did not beat this guy "into a coma." They beat him to death.

[sloopyinca]

Damn your Mavis Beacon-like talents.

[ZukRoo]

Should be quite interesting to see how that all turns out. Wow.

http://www.privacy-tools.no.tc

[sloopyinca]

Riggs, you say he was "beaten into a coma," when in fact he was beaten to death by the Fullerton cops.

[The NY Times]

First the coma, then the death. Sheesh! And you want to be my latex salesman?

[Michael]

Actually, Riggs is being pretty smart by doing so. It avoids the pratfalls of sensationalist propaganda and maintains factual accuracy.

[sloopyinca]

So you're saying he was put into a coma by the Fullerton cops and was killed by the guy who took him off life support?

He died as a direct result from injuries sustained in the beating, not by what happened in the hospital.

[Gray Ghost]

Didn't the coroner claim the cause of death was inconclusive? Given that, I'm not blaming Riggs for writing what he did. Potential liability can make people cautious. Gee, wonder if there's a lesson there?

[Bilbo]

It will only be a matter of time until all the videos are "confiscated" and somehow lost..... Medals will be awarded to the scum bag cops for valor in combating "crime"

[Paranoid]

I knew it!

[P Brooks]

Nice. I stay away for a week, and come back to find this.

I wonder how hard our self-described anti-statist police propaganda bot will work to magically transmogrify this into "suicide by cop".

[Restoras]

Welcome back! Bet you wished you'd stayed on vacation (if that's where you were)!

[Sudden]

Same here PB. I wasn't on vacation or anything (I actually read a lot of H&R on vacations). Just busy week at work and didn't get a chance to visit here, especially with NFL free agency going on.

[P Brooks]

As soon as the NYT can find a way to pin this on the teabagsterdz and their vicious budget-slashing, it will be on the front page.

[Paranoid]

I like you. You speak my language. Hug?

[wylie]

1. more funding would've kept Kelly safely off the streets.

2. more funding would've let the officers respond more appropriately to the situation.

Done and done. Wait, what the fuck am I doing writing their talking points for them?!

*revokes own keyboard*

[Progressive Guy]

The beating clearly indicates that officers need more sensitivity training and to be taught how to deal with the homeless and/or mentally ill. I mean, be honest: if you were in that situation, and hadn't received any training, would you know weren't supposed to beat the homeless man to death for your personal amusement? Judge not, lest ye be judged. That's what Jesus said, and think it's important to think about God and Jesus when we're talking about how much money the government should take from you to give to Baby Boomers and the politically connected. But not at any other time, because of the first amendment and whatnot.

[Enjoy Every Sandwich]

And don't forget the effects of Global Warming! Er...Global Climate Change! Er...what the fuck are we calling it this week?

[Restoras]

Klimate Kaos!

[P Brooks]

I wasn't on vacation; I put myself in the penalty box ("C'mon, man. I can quit any time I want, seriously!").

And I actually have a couple of projects with looming deadlines.

[rather]

The only thing I can do for him
http://rctlfy.wordpress.com/20.....crazy-man/

[CE]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant.

Then arrest and incarcerate the suspected murderers, and assure the public that your department takes murder cases seriously.

[mobiustrip]

This is really unfortunate. I think we all know what is to blame here in the end: people who depend on food stamps, of course.

[Colin]

I wonder if these cops were playing "Police Truck" on the way to the scene.

Tonight's the night that we got the truck
We're goin' downtown gonna beat up drunks

[Ken Shultz]

"It's not pleasant to see people in front of the police station calling the officers 'murderers,'" said one sergeant."

Incidentally, seeing officers beat some mentally impaired person into a coma is also "unpleasant".

[Sudden]

Incidentally, seeing officers beat some mentally impaired person into a fatal coma is also "unpleasant".

[The NY Times]

Hey fine we're on it!

And...and we present both sides!

http://freedominourtime.blogsp.....-cops.html

http://www.omaha.com/article/2.....-shut-down

Now will you shut up already?

[Fat Crack Ho]

Here's the money quote from Will Grigg's writeup:

"Ron Thomas . . . the grieving father is desperately wrong about one detail: The murderers were not 'rogue officers.' Once the gang assault on Kelly began, practically the only thing that could have saved his life would have been the timely intervention of a rogue officer."

[Sudden]

Seriously, I don't know how you can blame this on "rogue officers" when they called in six total cars to join in on the kill a schizo marathon. Seems like every fucking shield on duty had a turn. May they all be burned alive.

[Pip]

Here's what I don't get. Homeless people have significantly higher rates of HIV, Hepatitis, etc., so why would cops risk blood contamination? It seems so stupid.

[R C Dean]

Don't forget: 4 of the 5 killers are already back on the street, armed and licensed to initiate violence.

[Trident]

Don't forget: 4 of the 5 killers are already back on the street, armed and licensed to initiate violence.

...and 4 of 5 dentists agree that The Fullerton PD sucks!

[wylie]

4 of 5 dentists agree that The Fullerton PD is great for drumming up dental prosthesis business.

Ftfy.

[Warty]

Jesus, our cop fellatrix is much crazier than usual today.

[Mike M.]

Where is the great honorable governor Gerry Moonbeam on this by the way?

[Sudden]

He'll probably pardon the officers if anything happens to them. Damn LEO unions own this fucking state.

[dunphy]

your portrayal of unions is like a funhouse mirror version of a liberal's portrayal of evil corporations

wait, unions ARE corporations!

the irony!

[Coeus]

Except "evil coporations" don't shelter and legally defend their agents who beat people to death in the street. But you just love those false equivalencies, don't you?

[dunphy]

you are joking right? corporations shelter their people all the time, provide them legal counsel and in the case of crimes, sometimes cover them up.

you do realize this don't you? wanna talk private contractors in iraq? wanna talk energy companies? etc.

also, providing legal representation etc. is not covering up shit. that's called due process. due process is something reasonoids only support for criminal suspects who are NOT cops

[Coeus]

you do realize this don't you? wanna talk private contractors in iraq? wanna talk energy companies? etc.

I must have missed all of those reports where BP executives were beating people to death in the street. Care to enlighten me?

also, providing legal representation etc. is not covering up shit. that's called due process.

There you go, putting words in my mouth again. I didn't say that, and no one in this subthread did either. Reading is power. Look into it.

And paying for someone's legal defense is not due process. It's paying for someone's legal defense. Due process involves defense being available. Whether they pay or not, defense is available.

You've got to quit conflating union benifits with due process of law. I've brought this to your attention before. It's quite unbecoming.

[dunphy]

""Except "evil coporations" don't shelter and legally defend their agents who beat people to death in the street."

corporations have been caught many times covering up crimes, etc. whether or not it was "beating people to death in the street or not" and that's even assuming this beating WAS a crime (which again, i think quite possible, but hardly conclusive... yet)

the point is valid. you just obfuscate etc.

what exactly is your point? cop unions help cops with lawyers? the right to an attorney is part of due process. you got a problem with that?

what exactly do you have a problem with? an investigation (several) are being conducted and if the prosecution is smart, they will wait when and if they have solid evidence before charging.

[Coeus]

what exactly do you have a problem with?

You are constantly deflecting critism from LEOs and police unions by pretending that the objections are just as hysterical as the common left wing objection to corporations. You do this by either making false equivalencies or putting words in someone's mouth (or comment, as the case may be). It's tiresome and annoying.

what exactly is your point? cop unions help cops with lawyers? the right to an attorney is part of due process. you got a problem with that?

There goes that reading comprehension again. I restate:

And paying for someone's legal defense is not due process. It's paying for someone's legal defense. Due process involves defense being available. Whether they pay or not, defense is available.

You've got to quit conflating union benifits with due process of law. I've brought this to your attention before. It's quite unbecoming.

And just to make sure you've got it this time, I'll go further. When you say "due process for everyone but cops" when we bemoan the union lawyer, you're implying that when someone objects to obviously guilty cops getting an expensive lawyer from the union, and thus being shielded even monetarialy (in addition to qualified immunity) from their actions, it's the same as wanting the person to have no lawyer or trial.

When you say "due process for everyone but the cops" when we want a cop fired, you're implying that when we want to take a possibly dangerous person out of a position of authority, it's the same as wanting him sentenced in a court of law without a trial or representation. It's a willful deflection that can only be explained by one of two things:

1)It's a deliberate ploy to deflect criticism from way police misconduct is handled.

2)You don't actually know what due process of law is.

[Pudgeboy]

I can't watch the video now; did any of the witnesses claim the victim was packing two deadly cans of beer, possibly tall boys... maybe even Colt 45? That could explain the murder, especially if he attempted to swing them in a 'tomahawk' manner... that's not only dangerous, it's racist.

[R C Dean]

So, to pick up on the self-defense discussion above, the double standard for cops seems to be that it is effectively illegal for a bystander to intervene with lethal force to save the life of someone who is being beaten to death by a gang of cops.

Does that about sum it up?

[Gray Ghost]

R.C., never mind intervening with force to defend Mr. Thomas; I'd think it'd be de facto illegal to just walk up to them with a cell phone camera, tell them you were recording, have already called the Sheriff's Dept or CHP, and ask the Fullerton cops to stop.

All you'd need is for one of them to mistake your phone for a weapon and start beating/tasing/shooting you. Sucks, doesn't it?

[Pudgeboy]

Basically, I think you'd be interfering with a police action and arrested, if not beaten and killed. By the time it got sorted out, even if you were justified and could prove it, your life would be destroyed... and he'd still be dead.

[dunphy]

fwiw, my agency has a specific directive prohibiting any officer from interfering with anybody recording us. in a free society, people should be free to record us, and vice versa.

that's the way it is here

[hmm]

Most states have a specific directive stopping officers from interfering. But results may vary...

[dunphy]

most "states" do? really? provide evidence.

laws don't (generally) even work that way.

there are very few laws such as "police are not allowed to do X".

[dunphy]

still waiting for that evidence, hmm

this is another one of your false statements (like the cops are firearms expert one) that you will never support with evidence, and never admit you were wrong.

again, you said : "Most states have a specific directive stopping officers from interfering (with videoing)"

i call bullshit

provide evidence

[Crickets]

[dunphy]

yea, shocking. i know. hmm likes to make these grandiose statements of (alleged) fact ,... that aren't

heck, even my state doesn't have any such "directive" let alone law. my AGENCY has a policy.

[Phlogistan]

Thats the way it is EVERYWHERE.

I'm pretty damn sure there are "laws on the books", "procedures", and "Directives" in place to discourage 6 sworn officers of the law from the activities they perpetrated in Fullerton.

Your assurance, while most likely true, rings absurdly hollow

[dunphy]

no, it doesn;'t

yet again ignorant on the facts. most agencies don't have any policies regarding filming, etc

our agency took the proactive step of specifically directing us to protect people's right to do so

granted, we didn't have ANY cases i have heard of where we had ever arrested or harassed anybody for filming.

fuck, i was filmed twice yesterday. big fucking deal

have you even READ the policymanual of your local agency? i suggest not.

why? it's public record. before you criticize, get the facts.

be an INFORMED person

[Phlogistan]

lets just skip the logic and go straight to your indirect threats. You remember, "take me out" and inflict bodily harm again for my refusal to trust you.

[dunphy]

what the hell are you talking about?

oh, and again... have you read your local PD's procedure manual?

why not?

shouldn't a critic be informed?

guess not

fwiw, *i* have

[Phlogistan]

from july 6th

Phlogistan|7.5.11 @ 6:00PM|#

Dunphy appears to me to be of a very serious and sober character on topics concerning law enforcement.

Would I trust him at a traffic stop? No.
reply to this
dunphy|7.5.11 @ 8:18PM|#

yawn. in 20 yrs i've never had a civilian complaint that rose above "didn't adequately emphasize with the RP's complaint"... considering it was a non-criminal (civil matter) and she clearly wanted me to feel her pain etc. whereas I needed to get back to work... i can live with that.

you have nothing to fear from me on a traffic stop. like i said, i've carried one for 5 yrs and haven't even FIRED it.

otoh, if you attack me i will take you down hard. as is justified. i'm a nationally ranked strength athlete, and i find that command presence (physical etc.), politeness and treating people with respect means you don't usually have to use force.
reply to this
dunphy|7.5.11 @ 8:18PM|#

ugh... "EMPATHIZE" not "emphasize"
reply to this
Phlogistan|7.5.11 @ 10:49PM|#

Sir I respectfully submit that your response in no way works to gain my trust.

I have in no way shape or form behaved in a threatening manner toward you.

It is not your arsenal, your command presence, or your ranking which gives me pause.

I would react the same no matter what your profession.

Good day Sir

[dunphy]

you call THAT a threat?

whatEver dood.

get a life

[Phlogistan]

Yes I do. Just because I do not trust you, you contrived a fictional scenerio where I attack you making it "justified" for you to "take me down hard".

Seems like a standard and practiced logical mental progression for you.

I would absolutely hate to encounter one with such tactics holding a badge and gun.

[dunphy]

it's not a THREAT. get over yourself. have yer mama warm u up a bottle ... when i'm finished showing her who her daddy is, that is

[Night Elf Mohawk]

You'd have a better chance of saving him from a pack of rabid dogs. Lovely, ain't it?

[Gray Ghost]

Not sure if linked in any of the multitude of Reason posts on this subject, but http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/ has aggregated additional information about this case. A post there concerns a phone-in caller to the John & Ken radio show at 640AM. The caller claims to have inside information concerning the case and makes the following claims:

Notable claims made by the informant:

The officers involved were allegedly shown the video while they were writing their reports, allowing them to make sure that all of their accounts match.
Officer Hampton was allegedly attempting to handcuff the suspect but had to back off because the blood from another officer's strikes was splattering on him.
The informant claims that the officer who allegedly does most of the beating is a retired LAPD officer who was shot in the eye on duty three weeks on the job. Fullerton later hired him as the officer with one glass eye.
As recently as Friday night, this same officer was assigned to plain-clothes duty in the gang unit.
An officer was allegedly bragging about the beating the next day in the locker room.
There is a long history of cover-ups within the Fullerton Police Department
The police reports were ordered to be rewritten many times because management did not like the way the reports were written.

Of course, these claims are not substantiated, are just the word of some radio call-in guy, and could be from some griefer. Still, it will be interesting to learn whether the FBI investigation corroborates any of those points.

[Fred]

Is there any evidence that he was resisting arrest? It may be excessive force even still.

[gozwa]

I think unless he was wielding a double-edged battle ax like Aragon taking after an army of orcs, it's still pretty excessive.

[dunphy]

even the witnesses who saw the initial part of the encounter say he was resisting (initially).

but ... again... hitting somebody in the head with a flashlight is deadly force. it takes a LOT to justify that level of force.

a lot more than resisting

[Citizen Nothing]

Stop resisting.
That all.

[R C Dean]

And yet, 4 out of the 5 killers are back on the street, etc.

[GC]

As a man who just took Evidence law, if there is a criminal trial I hope the dialogue of that video gets in as a present sense impression.

[dunphy]

that was exactly my thought when i saw it. definitely seems to qualify as present sense impression hearsay exception. nice to see somebody who knows the law and thinks alike

[Citizen Nothing]

Actually, I think apologists like dunphy are worse, in a way, than the overt thugs.
You'd think that good cops would want to turn over every stone to root out any hint of brutality; be the first to call out even possible corruption, malfeasance, misconduct within their own ranks.
Instead, they want to parse directives, deconstruct statues, muse over contracts, looking for ways somehow to explain away these "isolated incidents" and get their buddies off the hook.
It's nice that dunphy admits that this case may rise to the level of a crime. But if this is the level of malfeasance that it takes for a good cop to admit that his pals just might have stepped over the line, then God help those of us they "protect and serve."
dunphy -- you need to look at yourself in the mirror.
I'm an upstanding, middle-class citizen, a pillar of my community, some might say. I've got four kids and a mortgage and a 401k and no arrest record (although I did cover the crime beat as a newspaper reporter for several years). I'm the proud son of a retired cop, for God's sake.
If you lose me, you're gonna, sooner or later, lose us all.

And it'll be on the head of the "good" cops -- the cops like you, that let it all go to hell rather than buck that thin blue line.

[Citizen Nothing]

(Sorry -- "statutes"
Deconstructing statues would be strange behavior, even for dunphy.)

[dunphy]

you can spout crap all you want

i guarantee you i care as much or more about rooting out/preventing excessive force and punishing those who engage in it than you do.

and of course your stupid tired meme about the public turning against us when poll after poll shows that to be false shows no amount of reality will upset your fantasies

[R C Dean]

It comes to this:

A cop who sees a fellow cop committing a crime and does not arrest him, just as he would any other citizen he saw committing that same crime, is not a good cop.

Apparently, there are very, very few good cops out there. Its a cultural thing, I know, natural human/tribal nature, etc. But that's just an explanation, not a justification, for the fundamentally corrupting "thin blue line", "us v. them", "police v. civilians" ideology.

[dunphy]

the vast majority of cops are good people. so obvious to anybody who has had contact with them extensively

[Mensan]

Apparently, this sort of thing isn't exclusive to police in the U.S.

[dunphy]

there are any # of countries where the cops are more heavy handed than the US.

reasonoids though, are just like liberals, in the respect that they think reflexively that we are worse.

one potent example is anti-wto rioters.

in seattle, NO rioters were killed and very few were injured, and the injuries were generally minor. several officers were injured too

in europe, people fucking DIED

[R C Dean]

"Other countries are worse" doesn't really do much for me. Sorry.

I have a pretty simple standard when it comes to the use of lethal force by the police. They can use it only when any non-LEO citizen can use it. Nice and clean and simple.

If the standards for citizens are too restrictive for the police, then maybe we need to loosen the standards for citizens, too.

The sick culture that puts cops back on the streets, with their guns and everything, within a few days after they beat somebody to death, has to be eradicated at all costs. If that means police are more at risk, so be it. If it means a few criminals get away, so be it.

Free country. Rule of law. All that jazz.

[Phlogistan]

Wow dunphry your right! We shouldnt hold any standards at all because there's all ways some place worse!

Wisdom learned! Dont be Europe! Whew everything is so much better now!

By the way could you please stop breath analyzing me via the shotgun taser up my anus. I said please! And I absolutely trust you so please no more signaling a left turn with your mag light against my forehead. I wouldnt want to pass up the $900,000.00 big ones my father will collect for your using me as a training aid.

[dunphy]

wow, phlogistan yer strawmen suck

nobody said we shouldn't hold any standards. we should hold STRICT standards and punish those who violate them

nice strawmen, though.

since you can't acknowledge the underlying point

[Joshua Corning]

and punish those who violate them

Then why are 5 (or 6) suspected murderers walking free tonight?

[dunphy]

if and when there is sufficient evidence for charging, they will be charged.

everybody loves a rush to judgment here. the arrest process isn't supposed to be punitive. these officers aren't going anywhere. i have seen cases where they arrested too soon and a cop won a sweet-ass lawsuit

assuming there is sufficient evidence to charge them with murder, i am confident that will happen.

[The Wine Commonsewer]

FPD did everything in their power to shove this under the rug. If it wasn't for the tireless efforts of my friend Christine Walker (and others) the thug cops who murdered Kelley Thomas wouldn't have a care in the world today.

So please spare me the bullshit that when sufficient evidence surfaces, they will be charged.

And all those good cops? The don't dare cross that thin blue line to step up and say: this is wrong.

[Professor]

The under lying point dunphy is the "Strict" standards exist, but are NOT applied. Which is the point YOU keep side stepping.

Do you think those 6 officers will be offered $900,000.00 in compensation for their actions? That would be a really SWEET lawsuit!

[dunphy]

ime, strict standards ARE applied. you can disagree, but that's my experience.

in SOME cases, they aren't and cops get off

contrarily, in other cases, the cops are railroaded and fired/prosecuted etc. without due process.

in the latter, sometimes they manage to see justice prevail.

an officer in my agency was recently rehired after he was fired and criminally tried. he won at trial and the arbitrator overruled the headhunters in my agency who fired him w/o cause.

it works both ways.

another officer was fired due to an obviously bogus DV and was later rehired and paid back pay for the unjust firing. the criminal case fell apart early on

in BOTH cases there was a rush to judgment

[Amakudari]

there are any # of countries where the cops are more heavy handed than the US.

And? I don't see how much there is to celebrate about our police being better than the ones in Russia or Egypt. Most countries in the world are terrible in general, but that shouldn't stop us from making demands on our political system for improvement.

[Pete Guither]

Kudos to the Bus Driver, who was doing an outstanding job. He immediately realized that he was in the position to document eyewitness testimony, asked a lot of good follow-up questions to get his riders talking about and confirming as many details as possible, and time-stamped it and informed his dispatcher.

[White Indian]

Maybe these cops were Libertarians defending private property.

"Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment ? unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares?"

~Murray Rothbard
American author and economist of the Austrian School who helped define modern Libertarianism

[jennifer]

I have to APPLAUDE the actions of this busdriver in his quick thinking to record these peoples words. Without him, this evidence may go without being told as these witnesses may never come forward,