Lawsuit Filed Over Off-Duty Sheriff's Deputies' Killing of Down's Syndrome Man at Movie Theater
Autopsy ruled the death a homicide by asphyxiation


Robert Saylor, who had Down's Syndrome, died in January when three off-duty sheriff's deputies working mall security in Frederick County, Maryland tried to pull the 290-pound-man out of a movie theater, tackling him. An aide had warned the cops that touching Saylor, who had returned to see "Zero Dark Thirty" he liked a second time without buying a second ticket, would cause him to "freak out." The coroner ruled his death homicide by asphyxiation, concluding he wouldn't have died if the off-duty deputies hadn't intervened. Nevertheless, a grand jury declined to indict them.
Now, Saylor's family is suing the movie theater and the deputies, claiming their son "died a violent, terrifying, and painful death" because of their negligence. The lawsuit also targets the sheriff's office, which was accused of stonewalling the investigation into Saylor's killing, and Frederick County. An attorney for the sheriff's office insists Saylor's death was an "accident" and suggested damage to his Adam's apple may have been caused by paramedics trying to insert a breathing tube, not by the off-duty cops.
The Department of Justice was looking into the killing as early as March, and reportedly informed the sheriff's office over the summer that it was opening a civil rights investigation into Saylor's killing, but has not made a more recent announcement about the case.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A grand jury can indict a ham sandwich, but it can't indict a pig.
concluding he wouldn't have died if the off-duty deputies hadn't intervened.
That is to say, "He wouldn't have died if they had not choked him to death."
There is no sugarcoating it. Nothing else will happen.
An attorney for the sheriff's office insists Saylor's death was an "accident"
And they're all mighty sorry, down at City Hall, but accidents happen, goshdarnit, and you can't punish a few decent men who just had a little bad luck. What would be the point of that?
Oh mah gawrd! He tried to see a movie a second time without paying for it! He obviously needed to be taught a lesson y'all!
But seriously, fuck those sheriff's (and the people defending their actions) with a hot rusty poker.
So he's pushing for manslaughter or negligent homicide?
I'm sorry but as I understand it, these guys were moonlighting as mall cops.
Therefore, why the fuck is the Sheriff's office even sticking its nose into the business except to arrest three fucking mall cops?
Because, silly, cops are never really off duty. They're entitled to all of the perks of being an officer whether they're on duty or off duty.
Being a cop isn't a job. It's a lifestyle. I means doing violence to anyone who doesn't immediately jump to your every wish, and being backed up by a gang of thugs who do the same thing.
And people wonder why cops have relationship troubles. I wonder if it's because they jump to violence at every available opportunity?
Just when you think you can't get ANY MORE OUTRAGED.
These guys are murderers, plain and simple. In a just society, they would be stripped of their badges, publicly tried and convicted of homicide.
I mean christ almighty, how can you even stick up for these fucking bully assholes? Were lives saved? Was there a danger of a movie being disrupted? I know cops love to complain long and loud about how it's a dangerous world out there for LEOs, but they always leave out the fact that THEY are the main reason why no one trusts or respects them.
they always leave out the fact that THEY are the main reason why no one trusts or respects them.
They leave that out because the concept never crosses their minds.
dunphy was always very adamant about how some polls proved that cops are well loved by all.
Yep. And if someone distrusts or doesn't respect the police, it's because they're butthurt about being convicted of a crime or they've been poisoned by the bigoratti. It could never be the fault of cops themselves. That's just plain impossible.
An aide had warned the cops that touching Saylor ... would cause him to "freak out."
"A-HA! He's a threat to public safety!"
Look at that kid. You really have to be a sick fucking weirdo to think he is a threat to anyone or anything. How the hell do you shoot someone like that? Even if he hit you, only a total immoral idiot would not understand that he is not fully in control of himself. These fuckers need to rot in prison for the rest of their lives and the theater that hired them needs to be sued into bankruptcy.
They didn't shoot him, they choked him. Over seeing a 2nd movie without paying.
He didn't do as he was commanded. From that point on the violence will escalate until you obey or die. They call it compliance.
Exactly.
Same argument I make when told there is no coercion involved in paying one's taxes. This is exactly what will eventually happen to anyone who doesn't pay up and gives the armed agents a hard time.
OFFICER SAFETY
That guy is scary looking.
Had this been some badass gangbanger, he'd have seen the movie twice without incident. In this "don't taze me bro!" world, use of force is always indirectly proportional to the present danger.
Andy Taylor would have just paid for the second showing.
I haven't cemented an opinion on this yet. If he was asked to leave an establishment and violently refused to do so, then that seems to open the door to what followed. Should management have had its private security try to evict him? I wouldn't have. But it seems they had the right to do so.
Whatever else, law enforcement should never be permitted to investigate one of their own. That should be handed off to state police or another department. I don't know that I would expect the other investigators would necessarily be above board, but it's something.
Not yet cemented, huh?
Believe me, you are fully cemented, as in thick as a brick.
The guy had Down's Syndrome.
The guy's aid warned the "cops" he was a special case.
The "cops" made an non-event into a violent encounter.
Then they killed him, "homicide by asphyxiation".
Whatever else, law enforcement should never be permitted to investigate one of their own.
But, but, but how else will they be able to destroy evidence, get their lies straight, and drag things out until they are no longer in the news?
Yes, I know, my plan would probably just foster a new era of extraordinary interagency cooperation in that regard, but I can dream, can't I?
Face it America. We now live under a system where breaking a law of any magnitude could result in immediate execution. It's like that stupid planet from that TNG episode, but with much more arbitrarity.
It's not even a matter of breaking the law. It's a matter of unquestioningly obeying the every whim of a police officer. Failure to do so will result in injury or death.
I'd say we live in a Judge Dredd world, but even Dredd was willing to let small things pass.
IDK about that. He once saw a perp littering and was going to fine him but the perp bolted. When Dredd caught up with him he sentenced him to 20 years in the iso-cubes. Then there was the time Danzo Pretzel came up with the scheme to rid the world of Dredd by tricking Dredd into committing a crime - they positioned a wanted man at the end of a one-way street, reckoning that Dredd would chase him but being so straight-laced, would sentence himself to 20 years on Titan for driving the wrong direction. Dredd just shot the wanted man from a distance. IIRC, Bolland created Dredd as a parody of (amongst other things) US cops and their propensity towards random violence. As always, life comes to imitate art.
I bet that retard learned to respect authority right before he died. Well done, brave officers.
Wasn't there a spike lee movie where the black folks rioted because the cops choked a kid out? Where's the spike lee outrage?
Not hot enough.
Usually, when you get caught trying to sneak into more movies they grab you and escort you out. No cops. No fine, just here's the door. They grab you so you don't run off and maybe slip into another theater or cause a ruckus.
And most people just go, they know they were doing something wrong, and with this kinda thing, sometimes you just get caught.
But you can't do that with a retard.
They don't understand. Some REALLY don't like being touched. And they freak.
And they're strong.
And they're special.
That means, even if they're smashing your brain out with their retard strength, if you dare defend yourself and hurt them in any way(even if all you hurt is their feelings), you suddenly become the bad guy--even if they've beaten you almost to death.
Quite frankly, I expect rancor for just saying these things.
The mall cops could have done everything wrong. They could be assholes.
But they could also be people who expected to escort someone to the door, like every other theater jumper who gets caught, who were suddenly confronted with a 300 pound, very strong man who's just gone berserk.
Maybe the 'aide'* should have paid for another ticket instead of trying to get a freebie with a retard. Maybe, just maybe, if the 'aide' had chosen not trying to rip off the theater this travesty would never have happened.
*The people who 'aide' the special folks I have to deal with are generally government workers of one type or another. Led astray by the State....
Maybe the 'aide'* should have paid for another ticket instead of trying to get a freebie with a retard. Maybe, just maybe, if the 'aide' had chosen not trying to rip off the theater this travesty would never have happened.
Since you obviously were there, I'm sure your testimony will be immensely enlightening during the trial.
So, you think Saylor chose to get the free film?
And look, no one's talking about the 'aide'.
Even though the 'aide' is the person that was responsible for Saylor. Even though it's highly likely that the 'aide' is the one that took the action to not pay. Unless you're all suggesting that Saylor knowingly decided to grab a free movie?
Not a peep.
But they're talking about the theater violating Saylor's civil rights--though, try as I might, I can't find a civil right to a second viewing of a film at a private business.
And they keep saying 'moonlighting' as if having a second job was a sin of some sort. Were they on a 'detail'--an off-duty job aquired through the department? Or were they just working as mall security, having parlayed their LEO 'experience' into this second job?
Again, the mall cops could have done everything precisely wrong. Or...
And they keep saying 'moonlighting' as if having a second job was a sin of some sort.
Its not, of course. The problem we're having is that the cop seems to have carried the immunity he has when doing his job into a setting where he was not doing his job.
And, of course, he carried his jackbooted attitude with him as well. And killed somebody.
Playing the role of Tulpa today is: Azathoth!!
Hey Reason.com, regarding that adchoice stuff in the corner that plays sound on its own. PISS OFF!
Even though the 'aide' is the person that was responsible for Saylor. Even though it's highly likely that the 'aide' is the one that took the action to not pay.
Based on my imperfect recollection of this story from the first time it appeared here, the aide/babysitter was trying to explain to him the need to leave when the goons arrived.
the mall cops could have done everything precisely wrong. Or...
What about some sort of sense of proportion? They weren't trying desperately to pull him off a ten year old girl as he was actively raping her, they were trying to get him to pay six bucks for a movie ticket.
Probably closer to $15.
Since the movie is propaganda, one could assume they had already paid for it anyway.
I don't trust cops any more then the next guy, but this may have been a situation of them simply trying to get him to leave, as is there job, and the 300 pound man freaking out. Now that's not to say they didn't use excessive force, I don't know, but thing may not be as some abusive officer beating on some poor defenseless retarded man
I'm going to start calling it a War on Citizens.
but cops are the good guys didn't yall understand that lesson from school? the only people that don't like police and what they do are the BAD guys.