Anaheim Police Shooting

Anaheim Police Deals with Community Upset at Their Propensity for Shooting at Them By Shooting at Them Even More

|

This was not going to end well.

Last night we linked out to the a live stream by journalist Tim Pool as he followed police through downtown Anaheim dispersing protestors who had gathered outside a City Council meeting to protest two recent fatal police shootings. Just as they had done over the weekend when confronted with angry community crowds, police fired into protesters, seemingly indiscriminately, this time using pepper balls and bean bags. Pool reported being shot at multiple times, even while holding his hands up in submission and trying to show his press pass. (His videos have all been saved and posted on his page)

Now that this protest is over (and I'm going to take a wild guess that it won't be the last), let's take a look at the damage. Via the Orange County Register:

More than 20 people were arrested as a crowd of 1,000 protesters clashed with police and damaged businesses in downtown Anaheim during a fourth day of unrest over two fatal officer-involved shootings this weekend.

During a news conference Wednesday morning at police headquarters, Anaheim police Chief John Welter said they will "not allow riotous, dangerous violations of the law by anyone. We will protect innocent people from being injured and property from being damaged."

At least six people were injured during the violent protest, with crowds setting trash fires, smashing windows at about 20 downtown businesses and throwing rocks and other projectiles at officers in riot gear who deployed bean bags and pepper balls at demonstrators refusing to disperse.

The Anaheim Police Department and City Hall were also damaged. A damage estimate was not immediately available.

Two Register reporters were also injured. One was hit by a rock and one in the foot by an unidentified "projectile," which makes it sound like he was shot by police but they are declining to say as much.

It's also not clear to me, either from news coverage or Pool's stream, whether the vandalism or fires started by the protestors began before or after the police started shooting at them. (This video looks like it came after the police started moving in on them, but I can't be sure)

As for the actual two fatal police shootings that led up to the clash, Anaheim's City Council voted Tuesday to invite federal investigators to examine both cases. It will be interesting to see, in the wake of the protests and successful recall election in Fullerton following the beating death of Kelly Thomas, how seriously Anaheim's leadership treats community anger.

The mother of Manuel Angel Diaz, the man shot and killed by police while running away from them, is suing for $50 million. The Anaheim Police Association has done exactly what police unions do:

One of the officers had recognized Diaz as a known gang member and saw him holding a "concealed object" in his waistband with both hands, according to the police association. He ignored their orders to stop running, then pulled the object from his waistband and turned toward the officers, the association said.

"Feeling that Diaz was drawing a weapon, the officer opened fire on Diaz to stop the threat," the association said in its statement. Anaheim police said after the shooting that Diaz was not armed; the association declined to say what the object that the officer reported seeing was.

In the second shooting, the day after Diaz was killed, Joel Matthew Acevedo fled from police following a short chase of a stolen vehicle, according to the police association. Acevedo then allegedly turned and fired on police, who then fired back. A handgun was recovered next to his body.

I'll be talking again about the case and last night's protests on Russia Today around 4 p.m. Eastern (1 p.m. Pacific).

NEXT: Extensive Ice Melt in Greenland: Time to Evacuate the Coasts?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Could some Californians help me out here. When I think Anaheim I think Disney Land, the Angels and those California suburbs that look like every kid who lives there owns a hot rod and listens to the Beach Boys.

    Somehow “growing up on the mean streets of Anaheim” sounds about as believable as growing up on the “mean streets of Pasadena”. Am I missing something? Has Anaheim changed?

    How the hell is there a police shooting controversy in Anaheim?

    1. 54th largest US city, about 350k people.

      Takes a lot more than Disney, Angels, and some suburbs to get there.

      Sounds like your data points on CA are a bit out of date.

    2. Has Anaheim changed?

      Yeah-uh. 50%+ Mexican. The Hispanic population has exploded – tripled – in the last couple decades. The White population down over 75%. God only knows what the figures are from Beach Boy days. But yeah, I’m guessing the Anaheim streets have gotten a bit mean.

      1. But there has never been a documented case of there ever being a single drawback to mass immigration. So that can’t be it.

        1. You’re just a jingoistic TEAM RED fascist (the worst of those, by far, being the T word).

          1. Teutonic?

          2. The T word?

            1. TEAM. C’mon, you’ve been around here long enough to know that.

        2. There are drawbacks to freedom. That doesn’t justify infringing the rights of others.

          1. Culture matters and diversity kills. You cannot keep freedom when you import hordes of 3rd world savages.

      2. All ‘bad neighborhoods’ need to be benchmarked against the east st louis/newark/baltimore/new orleans “thug index” for proper evaluation of appropriate ammunition loadout. Anaheim rates 3 magazines. 380 auto, relative to the higher thug standard of 13th ward New Orleans, ‘armored car weilding dual M240 belt fed armor piercing incendiary’

    3. Somehow “growing up on the mean streets of Anaheim” sounds about as believable as growing up on the “mean streets of Pasadena”.

      There are some very dangerous parts of Pasadena as well. Like all of SoCal, good neighborhoods can change quickly to bad neighborhoods in a matter of a few blocks. Anaheim has nice parts, as well as shitty parts.

      1. Long Beach is especially like that, isn’t it?

        A lot of people in the South Bay don’t even know that places like Belmont Shore even exist.

        Go two blocks in the wrong direct–two blocks!–and you’re in a war zone.

        1. Yep. Here in Belmont Shore it is all sunshine and lollipops. But I’m about a par 5 from complete bedlam. Spice of life.

        2. I live in Villarogosa’s neighborhood albeit on the edge, and we had a gang shooting about 150 yards from our place a couple of months ago.

    4. Yeah, Anaheim is still mostly like that. It’s mostly lower middle and middle class suburbia, with some fairly large employers in the area (Disneyland, milgov contractors, etc). Lacking hills, it doesn’t have that veneer of upper class neighborhoods that Fullerton does. Ditto for Buena Park, Santa Ana, and other northern Orange county cities.

      What Anaheim lacks, and Pasadena and Fullerton don’t, it an actual downtown. There is no non-tourist destination for residents. Once you get beyond the tourist zone it’s 99% suburbia. I hear it does have a farmer’s market, but I have no idea where it would be held.

    5. Yeah, I lived in Orange County the first 25 years of my life. In the city of Orange itself, right next to Anaheim, I lived in a house in a family neighborhood. Behind my backyard was a pathway to a quiet little grade school. There was frequently gang graffiti along that path. Gangs were everywhere. No escape.

    6. You would feel safe walking through the neighborhood that Diaz was shot pretty much any time the cops weren’t shooting. Anaheim is not Baltimore.

  2. I guess the streets of Anaheim are just too wide for barricades.

  3. In the second shooting, the day after Diaz was killed, Joel Matthew Acevedo fled from police following a short chase of a stolen vehicle, according to the police association. Acevedo then allegedly turned and fired on police, who then fired back. A handgun was recovered next to his body.

    I would say Acedevo needed killing. Fuck him.

    1. Sure sounds like one questionable shoot and one legitimate.

      The police reaction to the protests seems to be creating more outrage than either shooting. Idiots.

      1. Once you have one that’s apparently illegitimate, the rest of them all become unjustified in a lot of people’s minds.

        In the streets they used to chant, “No justice, no peace”. In college they used to teach us stuff like:

        “Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence.”

        —John Locke

        War is pretty much the same thing externalized. Country A did something to infringe on our rights, so now we’re no longer bound by the rules. We can drop bombs on them if we want to.

        Self-defense is the same thing. It’s saying basically that because you threatened me to such an extent, I should not be held to the normal standard for killing someone.

        At some point, we are no longer bound by the rules if the rule makers are treating us unjustly. There’s a question about the extent to which the police, or whomever, need to go before the rules no longer apply, but not that there’s a line there somewhere.

        So, the police shot someone in the back and then sicced a police dog on a protesting mother holding an infant? Is that where the line is? I don’t know, but I’d hate to think my fellow Americans would take that sort of behavior lying down.

        1. That second guy figured he was going to get shot in the back anyway so might as well get a shot off first.

    2. Sure sounds like one questionable shoot and one legitimate.

      The police reaction to the protests seems to be creating more outrage than either shooting. Idiots.

      1. The proles need to learn their place.

        1. And the squirrels.

  4. Look at all those anti-cop bigots, stirred up by Reason magazine and other biased reporting.

    They don’t know the full story, which will come out after a full investigation.

    If there was any wrongdoing on the part of the officers, they will be punished appropriately.

    There is no double standard.
    Cops are held to a higher standard than everyone else, and if there was any criminal misconduct they will be charged accordingly.

    Dunphy told me so.

    1. Too much shift key.

      1. You forgot to hope that that helps.

      2. He didn’t want to be charged with impersonating an officer.

    2. They don’t know the full story, which will come out after a full investigation

      You mean the investigation of the cops, by the cops, that will conclude that the cops followed all procedures correctly?

      1. Yes, that one.
        The fact that every single investigation of cops killing someone is found to be justified isn’t proof that the investigations are a mere formality to placate the masses, it is proof in the professionalism and integrity of the law enforcement community.

        Dunphy told me so.

  5. OT – Unions, still hatin’ on the coloreds:

    The Chicago School system is rapidly collapsing. Its graduation rate is a horrid 56 percent, its finances are in tatters, and even though the Chicago Teachers Union was offered a 10 to 15 percent raise, CTU officials still want to strike claiming it isn’t enough. So, what went wrong? CTU President says it’s all because of Chicago’s “lower class students” and “students of color.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G…..s-of-Color

    1. You can’t expect people to teach those animals for anything under 100K a year and full retirement after 15 years.

    2. The problem is clearly that Chicago is not doing enough of what they are doing. The only solution is to raise taxes, so that they can do more of what they are doing. Then it will work for sure.

  6. Running away from an armed cop is clearly aggressive behavior.

    1. Turning and shooting sure as hell is. The first case is debatable. But the Acedevo case is open and shut.

      1. If you believe the cops, that is, John.

        Have they given you a reason to believe them in the past?

        1. In the case where the guy stole a car, was running and there was a gun found at the scene yes. I don’t like cops either. But in some cases people really do shoot at them.

          1. Just the day before they said the same thing about the other guy, and he had no gun. So…you still believe them?

            1. There was a gun at the scene. Maybe it was an infamous drop gun. But I doubt it. I would have to see more evidence before I believed that.

              1. I would have to see more evidence before I believed that.

                I would have to see evidence that the cops aren’t lying through their lying teeth before I believed that.

            2. Just the day before they said the same thing about the other guy, and he had no gun. So…you still believe them?

              If the second one was a drop gun, why wouldn’t they have used a drop gun on the first?

              1. “Shit, I forgot my drop gun!”

                “Shit, I used mine the other day! Bob, you got one?”

                “No, I left it in my other bribery bag.”

                “Oh well, we’ll just say it looked like a gun.”

    2. Clearly running from a policeman is assault, because you’re striking bottom of the poor officer’s feet with asphalt.

  7. Cops versus a douche bag in a Guy Fawkes mask is a really tough choice. Can both sides lose?

  8. Why do they always have to smash up private property? Throw rocks at the cops, not Starbucks.

    I was cheering the protestors but this kind of thing always irks me. It gives police a way to look like the good guys.

    The previous shooting was of people standing there doing nothing, making the cops look like thugs.

    1. Because any protest is immediately taken over by assholes like the guy in the Fawkes mask there to just tear shit up.

    2. That is why you shoot at protestors the first time, get them all riled up for next time. You then use those angry responses as excuses for prior overly aggressive behavior! Perfect.

    3. Every respectable protest needs to have people going around kicking the shit out of folks like that, and filming them where they don’t hide their identity. If they’re just assholes, they can go to jail. If they agent provocateurs without plausible deniability, it can lead to a very embarrassing situation for those that employ them.

    4. Sometimes it’s the police smashing up private property to make protesters look bad.

  9. “Feeling that Diaz was drawing a weapon…”

    mmm. I see. If a civilian shot someone, and then explained to the court, “I had a *feeling* he was drawing a gun…”, the prosecuting attorney would pounce = “DID YOU IDENTIFY A WEAPON OR NOT?!”

    Whereas, police? Theys got some extrasensory-perceptions and get a pass every now and then when their ability to channel future events through their *feelings* serve them poorly.

    1. That is the entire problem. What cops refuse to understand is they have to take the risk that the other guy’s action will beat their reaction.

      The fact is that if some lunatic is willing to commit suicide by cop in order to kill a cop, he will do it. That sucks. But that is what they get paid for. They can’t fucking shoot until they know the guy has a weapon and means them harm.

      1. But that is what they get paid for. They can’t fucking shoot until they know the guy has a weapon and means them harm.

        Couldn’t agree more.

      2. Soldiers and Marines have to live with “PID” (Positive ID) in their Rules of Engagement – why can’t we have our own police in the US do that?

        1. Because soldiers and Marines are held accountable for their actions, whereas the police are not due to politicians kowtowing to their unions, a public largely not as concerned with the truth as with feeling “safe” and a media that is more concerned with access than with finding the truth.

        2. Also, don’t they get court-martialed for kicking in the wrong door?

          1. I would assume so. Our fine men and women (no sarc) in the military respect their rules of engagement and actually understand that there are consequences for when they operate outside their authority.

        3. Soldiers aren’t allowed to unionize.

        4. I heard an interview with a police officer about some shooting and he said that they aren’t trained to think they are trained to react because you don’t have time to think in a dangerous situation. What a crock of shit. If an infantryman can asses they situation in a war zone, a cop can take a moment to make sure they aren’t just plugging holes in innocents. No wonder my buddy hated having cops in his unit.

      3. We don’t bury enough cops.

    2. mmm. I see. If a civilian shot someone, and then explained to the court, “I had a *feeling* he was drawing a gun.. after I broke his door down, shot his dog, threw flash bombs at his family, and tased granny … but Ooops it was the wrong house, and that was a cell phone…

      Yes, that works every time for a civilian.

  10. We will protect innocent people from being injured and property from being damaged.

    Even if we have to kill every last one of them to do it.

    1. Sometimes you have to destroy the village to save it.

  11. The second shooting is of little consequence and I doubt the protestors are too terribly upset about that one.

    These protests don’t erupt from nowhere. What HAVEN’T we heard?!

    1. I agree. Things must have been stewing under the service for a while.

  12. It should be obvious by now; every police officer inhabits a special gun-free zone. Any suspected violation is punishable by summary execution.

    OFFICER SAFETY!

  13. Just another day in the inevitable march towards an American police state.

    1. Or its March towards anarchy. Once people lose respect for the laws and the police, the result is just as likely to be anarchy as it is a police state.

      1. Which would lead to a police state, John. Politicians have far too much invested in their power, to let it go without military intervention towards the populace.

  14. Sounds to me like Mr. Acevedo got everything he was asking for.

    1. True, ITFPAPIC. From other reports, it looks like he was struggling with the cop that shot him for a couple of blocks off and on. Not sure what to believe until some witnesses come forward, but I’ve learned to be rather skeptical of these cookie-cutter police reports.

      1. ITFPAPIC?

        1. If The Fact Pattern As Presented Is Correct.

          Thank me later.

        2. If The Fact Pattern As Presented Is Correct.

          It’s an acronym a lot of the cool kids use that are in the policing biz. It sets them apart from the proles.

  15. First off, the cop lacked any real reasonable suspicion to stop the guys in the alley to begin with. Once cops are prosecuted for making bullshit stops that serve no purpose other than to prove to these stupid niggers and spics who is in charge, then we can start seeing an end to these senseless shootings.

    And what about the whole, “he was throwing unidentified items onto rooftops as he ran” claim? Where are the items he threw? If they existed, we’d have already had them identified to make the guy look worse. Sounds to me like a pig rolled up on some people he didn’t like the look of (read: dirty wetbacks), he decided to whip out his dick and show them who the boss is and got pissed off when one ran and shot him dead.

    There is no accountability as long as cops are free to stop people with impunity. The only way to correct this is for cops to be wired and have a camera on at all times, and for them to be available live or on tape to any person at any time. And for them to be treated as criminals when they change their stories like anybody else would be.

    1. They claim to be so concerned about officer safety. But then they spend their time doing the most dangerous thing they can do, pulling people over. If they gave a shit about safety, they might want to avoid doing unsafe things without a good reason.

      1. That’s one of the things I loved about living in Puerto Rico. Not sure how it is now, but when I was there about 15 years ago, the cops drove around with their flashers on at all times. If they wanted someone to correct some behavior, they pulled up beside them and gestured for them to do so, be it speeding, not wearing a seat belt or some other infraction.

        They also made it legal to go through a red light or stop sign from 9 pm until 7 am after assessing the safety of the intersection. It cut down on carjacking and kept them out of harm’s way.

        I do not remember hearing of a single violent act perpetrated on or by a cop the entire two years I spent there. OCSD and the Anaheim PD could learn a lot from the Puerto Rican cops.

    2. And the police call them three suspects. Suspected of what, being brown in an alley? There wasn’t any crime they were looking into. But when you classify them as suspects suddenly the act of running makes them seem criminal.

  16. Once people lose respect for the laws and the police

    And whom shall we blame for this?

    1. The population is unworthy of its rulers. You know that Brooks.

      1. People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up.

        -Terry Pratchett, Night Watch

    2. May that day come sooner rather than later. Only then will there be true “justice” in America.

  17. Glossing over the protester violence with tenuous deniability, not one mention of thrown chairs and smashed businesses.

    Are we officially steering into “MSNBC/Reuters/CNN/HuffPo on OWS” territory here?

    1. Look up a ways, dumbass.

    2. There’s even a link to a video showing it.

  18. If The Fact Pattern As Presented Is Correct.

    If the story holds up to even the most casual scrutiny, in other words.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.