Kelly Thomas

Watch: Video, Pictures Convince Public, But Not Jurors, in Kelly Thomas Case

|

A jury has acquitted two officers on trial for the beating and death of Kelly Thomas, a homeless man with schizophrenia, as Scott Shackford notes below.

Reason TV has covered the case extensively for years, not only because of the brutal, horrific nature of Thomas's death, but also because of the integral role that new media and the democratizing effect of technology has played in the perception, coverage, and visibility of the incident.

A picture snapped on a cell phone and surveillance footage uploaded to Youtube both fueled and sustained public outrage in a case that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. To many, the picture, the video, and the audio provided incontrovertible evidence of police abuse. The images and sound, accessible to anyone who looked for it, were enough to lead to the first murder trial of a police officer in Orange County history.

In this case, those same images and sound were not enough to convince a jury to convict the officers of 2nd degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, or excessive force.

Regardless of your feelings about the outcome, Reason TV's original documentary, produced only months after the beating occurred, is a must-watch video for anyone interested in this case or in the role technology is playing in the ever-evolving relationship between the police and the citizenry:

Advertisement

NEXT: Tonight on The Independents: A-Rod Rage, Christie's Acting Skillz, Hillary's Hit List, the French President's Mistress, Sen. Bernie Sanders on the NSA...Plus a Special Overtime Segment!

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. If they can get away with this they will feel invincible.

    1. They already do feel invincible. That’s why they did it–they knew they could get away with it.

      1. Their hubris level is pegged.

        They may just act on this to the point where the engender a massive pushback.

  2. Time for federal civil rights charges against everyone involved, from the two cops to the trial judge.

    1. Are the mentally ill a protected class? I’m not sure if Thomas would be covered under any civil rights legislation.

      1. The charge would be deprivation of life without due process, and the courts wouldn’t consider it double jeopardy, but that’s what it would be in practice.

        1. As if the cops ever experienced single jeopardy.

  3. This kind of shit is what happens when you have a society that is constantly reminded that police officers, and other “first responders”, are the greatest heroes in the history of man who can do no wrong, ever.

    1. Logically, police and firefighters can only be second responders at best.

  4. The precedent set my these acquittals is absolutely staggering. If the citizens of Fullerton are not rioting by dawn, then fuck you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

    1. The citizens of Fullerton (and Orange County) have taken to this blog post to protest. It’s just how white people protest.

      1. Yeah, wouldn’t it be so much better if white people reacted by targeting Korean businesses that had absolutely nothing to do with this case and by beating random truck drivers half-to-death?

        1. No, but I wouldn’t shed a tear if the houses of both of these thugs got the “Waco” treatment.

  5. I try to stay mostly apolitical on facebook, but this is revolting. Everyone should be angry, regardless of party affiliation.

    1. Blech, still have vacation brain. Facebook was only referenced because I posted an article about the acquittal. Just ignore me for a few weeks until I’m “normal” again.

    2. Blech, still have vacation brain. Facebook was only referenced because I posted an article about the acquittal. Just ignore me for a few weeks until I’m “normal” again.

        1. Vacation Squirrels Strike!

          1. The squirrels are clearly codependent and upset that I was gone for so long.

    3. This is an awful jury decision, unqualified. I’m disgusted by it, but not surprised.

      It would help to know a little bit about how this happened though. Fullerton demographics place it on a 60/40 white to asian ratio, but 40/60 white to asian ratio of public school students. This is typical of Orange County as a whole, from which the jury was selected. The cops there are Joseph Wambough’s The Thin Blue Line or New Centurians who preserve what’s left of their middle-class lives against the LA tide. The jurors might not be seeing the specifics of the case at hand clearly, but reacting to the tide. Again, my speculation about their better angles still doesn’t excuse it.

      1. Are you second guessing not buying the house?

        1. Chinese girl smarter than widget, make more wampum than Widget. But Widget like her anyway. Widget not in live Chinese girl house everyday. Widget buy teepee in Ventura county instead.

          1. Google Translate is telling me: You bought a house in Ventura, separate from the house where your wife lives.

            I might have several follow questions, but I’ll refrain.

      2. This is typical of Orange County as a whole, from which the jury was selected. The cops there are Joseph Wambough’s The Thin Blue Line or New Centurians who preserve what’s left of their middle-class lives against the LA tide.

        1st) Shove your LA race baiting bullshit. A hispanic cop just got off for murdering a white kid. That hardly fits the white suburbs afraid of duh blacks horse shit.

        2nd) Most of the Asian in OC (and the hispanics for that matter) did not come from LA – no one here thinks that they’re being invaded by inner city felons.

        3rd) Asians are generally more deferential to authority and therefor more likely to vote not guilty in a situation like this (pure supposition on my part).

        4th) Every person that I’ve talked to that is familiar with the case, which has been a surprising large number thinks that the cops are absolutely guilty of murder and should have been sent to prison.

        1. This case demonstrates the thoroughly corrupt nature of our government and justice system in general and doesn’t say anything about the people of Fullerton or OC or anywhere else for that matter.

        2. 1. I’ve lived in OC my entire life and I’ve never gotten the impression that we are being invaded by people from LA. Maybe a gated community like Rancho Santa Margarita in South OC would be afraid of minorities, but North OC is pretty diverse both in terms of race and economic backgrounds.

          2. Most Asians seem to be first or second generation, at least in the very Korean community where I live.

          3. I don’t know about that. But since many Asians in Orange County are small business owners I imagine they are sympathetic to the law and order argument and disdain vagrants.

          4. Agree. Even my parents, who are pretty skeptical of my anti-police views thought this was bullshit.

          1. Westminster is like Little Saigon…

      3. I’ve read reports where the court was filled with uniforms. Can’t imagine that the jury didn’t feed intimidated and threatened if that was true.

        1. Reminds me of those thugs that wore Stop Snitchin’ shirts to the murder trial in Boston in order to intimidate the jury.

  6. “In this case, those same images and sound were not enough to convince a jury to convict the officers of 2nd degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, or excessive force.”

    Never served on a jury; been tossed on whatever they call the lawyers interviewing each prospective juror every time I got close.
    So am I to presume that a jury is made up of people who, what, are blind? I mean, how do you see the vid and say ‘naah’?

    1. Juries are made up of people selected by lawyers. The common clay of the new West. You know… morons.

      1. Well, db, since you are my guest and I am your host, what’s your pleasure? What do you like to do?

      2. I’ve been on three juries, asshole. There are limits to how selective they can be.

        1. Someone has a pretty high opinion of himself.

          1. “not a moron” is a high opinion?

            1. In this case?

            2. db was quoting Blazing Saddles, let’s don’t be silly.

        2. Our courts depend on bootlicking authority worshipers like you.

          1. He set himself up for that.

          2. Guess db nailed it.

            Yep.

      3. The comosition of juries is a major fucking problem with the system.

        My solutions:

        1) Pay jurors a substantial amount of money so that people want to serve on them. Maybe $300 a day or more.

        2) Streamline the in court proceedings so that cases can be tried expeditiously. This case, for example should not have taken more than a couple of days.

        1. Make it $1000 and I’ll consider taking 1 day off of work.

          1. I’ve only served on one jury, back before the crash when my business was such that I could be absent for a relatively extended period of time.

            It took almost two weeks to hear a bullshit contract dispute that should have taken a day or two at most.

            I’d like to serve more often by I just can’t take two weeks off of running my business now.

            1. I consulted for the company that designed the jury summons system for LA county, so I know how to beat the summons.

              1. Register as a Libertarian. Your chances of being selected drop 99%.

        2. “The selection of a jury to try Scopes, which went on all yesterday afternoon in the atmosphere of a blast furnace, showed to what extreme lengths the salvation of the local primates has been pushed. It was obvious after a few rounds that the jury would be unanimously hot for Genesis. The most that Mr. Darrow could hope for was to sneak in a few bold enough to declare publicly that they would have to hear the evidence against Scopes before condemning him. The slightest sign of anything further brought forth a peremptory challenge from the State. Once a man was challenged without examination for simply admitting that he did not belong formally to any church. Another time a panel man who confessed that he was prejudiced against evolution got a hearty round of applause from the crowd….

          In brief this is a strictly Christian community, and such is its notion of fairness, justice and due process of law. Try to picture a town made up wholly of Dr. Crabbes and Dr. Kellys, and you will have a reasonably accurate image of it. Its people are simply unable to imagine a man who rejects the literal authority of the Bible. The most they can conjure up, straining until they are red in the face, is a man who is in error about the meaning of this or that text. Thus one accused of heresy among them is like one accused of boiling his grandmother to make soap in Maryland….”

          H.L. Mencken

          1. FYI – It’s my understanding that the Scopes trial was basically a made-up/show trial where all participants, including the defendant, agreed to going to trial, knew about it long before, and did so with the knowledge that it would fail, either locally or on appeal.

    2. Sucks to be on the losing end of jury nullification, don’t it?

      1. Nothing to do with that.
        An attorney/friend tells me I’ll never serve as both sides want people who believe the “stories” they are told and make judgements base on those “stories”. I tend to be skeptical.

        1. Dude, the voir dire interview is usually like two minutes long and is supervised by a court official to make sure they don’t ask prejudicial questions. There’s no friggin’ way they can determine how skeptical a person is.

          1. Well, in that case, I guess I just got lucky. Certainly glad to hear from one who knows all!
            BTW, you’re an idiot.

            1. Did you call people idiots during voir dire? That must have been the clue to your towering intellect.

          2. There’s no friggin’ way they can determine how skeptical a person is.

            If that’s the case, why are jury selection consultants are employed?

            1. Because people are idiots? There is no proof that it actually works any better than astrology.

              1. Because people are idiots?

                Except when they sit on juries, right?

                1. If you think juries are mostly idiots, you should be completely against jury nullification.

                  1. You said that people are idiots; yet implied that people on juries aren’t. Which is it, then?

              2. There’s plenty of proof, but it is proprietary.

                1. So, the same as astrology? Lady Cleo and the Psychic Friends Network have proof of ESP and telekinesis, too.

                  1. What would constitute proof that jury selection ‘works’? They’re one-off events; there’s no way of conducting controlled trials.

                    With the same effort it can be said that there’s no proof that military leadership ‘works’; everything taught at military academies (especially at staff colleges) are like astrology, as there’s no proof that they ‘work’.

                    1. I guess it’s both unverifiable and unfalsifiable. And thus unsuitable for proving that lawyers fill juries with drooling idiots.

                    2. You said it yourself. You were chosen three times. How much more proof do you need?

                    3. You said it yourself. You were chosen three times. How much more proof do you need?

                      Yep.

                    4. Sevo did not say that lawyers fill juries with “drooling idiots”; he said that lawyers try to fill juries with (or at least try to place one or more) people who are buyers for narratives (obviously differing narratives of the prosecution and the defense).

                      The very existence of peremptory (“without reason”) challenges to prospective jurors indicates that there are qualities of prospective jurors which don’t constitute a ’cause’ to have them dismissed — yet the opposing sides are given a limited number of opportunities to challenge prospective jurors peremptorily. If there’s absolutely no way of drawing any conclusion about the prospective juror’s history, demeanor or answers to the juror questionnaire, then peremptory challenges serve no purpose whatsoever. It might not be proven to your satisfaction that peremptory challenges could help the case for the side which issues the challenge to a particular would-be juror, but people who do such work believe that at least some of the time such analysis and the resulting challenge help their side. Because there’s no way to prove that peremptory challenges (and the work done in order to make decisions about their use) don’t ‘work’ better than chance, blanket condemnation (“people are idiots”) of jury selection (consultants) only demonstrates your blinkers.

                  2. Yeah, exactly the same as astrology, moron. Do you even want an honest response? I have one, but I’m not convinced it’s worth the time…

      2. Sucks to be on the losing end of jury nullification, don’t it?

        We wouldn’t know since that’s neither here nor there you retard.

        1. The jury chose not to apply the law to the defendant despite the fact of guilt being indisputable. That’s jury nullification eight days a week and twice on Sunday.

          1. A bad jury decision does not equal jury nullification

            1. Right, it’s only nullification if libertarians agree with it.

              A drug warrior would consider your acquittal of a proven drug dealer to be a “bad decision” too — does that mean it’s not nullification?

              1. What is murder by cop effectively nullified?

              2. Tupla –

                I honestly assumed you knew this.. but jury nullification is a specific thing with a specific meaning and unlike many others sites on the internet, most here use it for its actual meaning – which is nullification happens when the jury rejects the law itself – IE – they say/believe the defendant did what was claimed, but vote not guilty for whatever reason.

                This isn’t the same as voting not guilty because you’re talked yourself into believing the defendant is not guilty.

                But you are correct that it could be possible this jury did say in deliberations “they did it and are guilty as a matter of law but we shouldn’t convict” and that carried the day.

                But unlikely since that takes an actual active approach where they have to agree even with guilt they don’t care and US citizens are against such “aggressive” moves these days.

                More likely is a general feeling of not wanting to convict LEOs, then reasoning back from that conclusion to reach a not guilty verdict.

                But who knows.

                1. I don’t believe it’s as complicated as that. Given the high percentage of law enforcement in the courtroom, I wouldn’t be surprised if the jury voted not guilty to avoid future problems for themselves and their families.

          2. Holy shit Tulpa you are one stupid motherfucker. Bad jury decisions =/= jury nullification.

  7. This is beyond parody. Dave Chapell had that skit about the OJ and R. Kelly jurors. “If it was on video – I would say ‘is that really him? Does his Mama say that it is him?”

    This is worse than the joke. Anyone who can watch that video and see resisting arrest and legitimate use of force instead of murder is suffering from some serious mental disorders. Let’s not forget that they had no legitimate cause to be harassing him the way they were anyway. They went beyond investigating car break-ins and began just screwing with him to try to provoke a reaction. Then they announced their intention to beat him. Then they beat him. To death. This verdict is indefensible.

    1. Absolutely.

  8. I wanna know what the jury instructions were.

    1. There was only one jury instruction, a little poem:

      “The police help you,
      so don’t hurt the boys in blue”

      1. I think it was:

        See those heros in the back of the courtroom. They know who you are and where you live.

        1. I think it was:

          See those heros in the back of the courtroom. They know who you are and where you live.

          If they delivered a guilty verdict they would have had to move out of state. There is no way they would have been safe from the police.

    2. Me too. I was on a jury that hung 6 to 6. We were told about a violent juvenile offense on the part of the accused, and then instructed not to take it into account. The judge didn’t strike it from the record, but we were just supposed to ignore it. And one juror, the most willfully obtuse of them all, actually made a fuss that the accused had no criminal record. It made no difference – the case was clear with or without that information – but damn, what an idiot. We were also instructed that we could take into account that the victim and perpetrator were of different races. Never mind that the victim chased her attacker when he was interrupted during commission of the assault and fled the scene, and that the chase was on video, minus the 3-second lapse before they came into view of the security camera. She chased him out the door of the establishment, where she stopped and the security guards and exterior cameras picked up. Followed him all the way down the block and across the street before he was apprehended. Those people believed he ran like that because she scared him. They couldn’t make a real decision because the cops didn’t take a DNA sample from under her nails. OMG. It took 2 months to get over my rage.

    3. Simple:

      “We will know how you vote”

  9. Not even excessive force is beyond ridiculous. This is like something out of Jim Crow.

    1. Funny you should mention that:

      ??Modern day police in the United States evolved primarily, from slave patrols in the South and city guards in the North; both were concerned with the control and containment of Black people. The comparison of police officers to slave catchers goes against the grain of what most people reflexively think about police. Thus, it can be difficult for some to critically analyze them and their function. The common cultural image of police is that they are our benefactors doing the dangerous job of protecting us. This, among other notions, is not as true as one might think. For example, according to the 2010 national census of fatal occupational injuries, garbage collectors have a more dangerous job than police officers. Inversely, Garbage men pose no threat to the rest of us. To the contrary, they provide an essential public service. Police officers on the other hand, kill almost 5 five times as often as they are killed.

      Link

      Even the mouth-breathers at firedoglake get some wood on the ball every once in awhile.

  10. Well, how about a victory for the First Amendment: White House admits that it can’t force Jimmy Kimmel off the air

    WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:
    Investigate Jimmy Kimmel Kid’s Table Government Shutdown Show on ABC Network
    I was very disturbed by Jimmy Kimmel’s ‘Kids Table’ show. It was aired on ABC recently and talked about killing all the Chinese so that the states do not need to pay back their debts to China. The kids might not know anything better. However, Jimmy Kimmel and ABC’s management are adults. They had a choice not to air this racist program, which promotes racial hatred. The program is totally unacceptable and it must be cut. A sincere apology must be issued. It is extremely distasteful and this is the same rhetoric used in Nazi Germany against Jewish people. Please immediately cut the show and issue a formal apology.

    Created: Oct 19, 2013
    Issues: Human Rights
    TOTAL SIGNATURES
    105,111

    Response:

    The Federal government cannot force ABC to remove this show. The First Amendment of the Constitution protects free speech, even if individuals might personally find it offensive or distasteful. It may be upsetting when people say things we might personally disagree with, but the principle of protected free speech is an important part of who we are as a nation.

    1. They had a choice not to air this racist program, which promotes racial hatred.

      Given the Chinese hate the Japanese, if all the Chinese were killed it is at least as valid an argument that doing so would promote an end to racial hatred.

    2. Right up to the point where they criticize Dear Leader, then the FCC license gets yanked.

    1. Isn’t that special.

    2. Actually there’s a lawsuit going on that cites 3A as a cause of action. Cops took over a home and ate their food and drank their drinks. Quartering troops.

  11. Its official:

    The writers of Archer need to make GTA 6.

    1. Lana: You want us to set up a drug cartel?

      Mallory: How hard could it be? Mexicans do it.

      But yeah, doing a send-up of 1980s action movies AND Nashville is going to be awesome.

  12. I’m taking my son to Denny’s before school tomorrow morning. Any recommendations? (Don’t act like you’re above it).

    1. Get one of the Slams. Last time I enjoyed their fine fare, they were doing a special menu for the Hobbit that had some really good deals, but that’s probably over now.

      1. That’s good faith advice. I’m sorry I called you a moron above.

    2. Do you think it’s better than Norms?

      1. Being better than Norm’s is not that difficult. At least the one on Hawthorne near 190th. And Norm’s is like twice as good as Spires which is still in business for some reason.

        1. Although the one on Hawthorne and MB Blvd said “Spi es” for the longest time. I don’t think I’ve ever been in a Spires.

          And how do we feel about Hof’s Hut?

          1. Only ate there once years ago, so don’t remember.

            And all Spires suck, regardless of location. They can’t even do mashed potatoes right.

            Is Carrow’s still there? Had to deal with one of the stupidest servers ever in my life there.

            1. I know there are Carrow’ses around, but I never see them. There are also a few Cocos around although the one on Hawthorne across from the Del Amo is now a Fresh and Easy and Chic-fil-A.

              1. Ahh, the stupid waitress was at Coco’s not Carrow’s.

                1. Coco’s is a 1/2 block from my house, Carrow’s is all the way in Torrance. Coco’s has the dubious distinction of serving me the worst prime rib of my life (and I am a prime rib expert).

              2. Coco’s is next door to Chili’s at the MV mall.

            2. I do remember that my mom went to Hof’s Hut all the time with her equally bourbon-soaked, gravelly-voiced circle of chain-smoking friends.

              So if they liked it, I’m not likely to have enjoyed it.

              1. Warren, were you a South Bay local?

                1. Yup, grew up in L.A. County a block from the L.A. Strip.

                  Worked in Torrance, Hermosa, Redondo, El Segundo…

                  I really miss it but if I move again I don’t want to relocate inside California. Instead I’ll move to a more gun and business friendly state.

          2. Spires is very good to its senior citizen customers.

        2. I think Norm’s is fine, at least the one I’ve been to on Beach Boulevard in Huntington Beach.

          I would choose it over Denny’s

      2. Never had Norms.

    3. Coffee and cigarettes.

    4. Yeah, go to The Kettle instead.

      1. Isn’t The Kettle related to Mimi’s Cafe or something?

        1. I don’t know. I love The Kettle but was profoundly disappointed the one time I ate at Mimi’s.

            1. And when was this? Didn’t see a date on the release.

              Anyway, it’s probably a one-off event and next time I’m in town I’ll be stopping in. Provided they don’t get sued out of existence of course.

              1. 5 years ago? One of my friend’s grandma had to spend 3 days in the ER because of the salad.

        2. The Kettle people own Tin Roof Bistro, which has the best lunch special in town.

          1. The last section on this page talks about the Simms Restaurant Group. I had no idea how much they were involved in.

            1. I knew about Simmzy’s too (only had liquids there, no foods), but not about Lazy Dog. That is a lot of revenue.

          2. I’ll look into it if I have the time.

            1. Lunch special on top right. Go with the french onion soup and caesar. For the sandwich, I usually get the BLT. If you don’t love it, I’ll let you kick me in the penis and put it on youtube.

              1. You’ve presented me with a perverse incentive.

          3. Is there still that retro diner on La Cienega near Sunset where every table had its own toaster? I remember some fine late nights in the late 80s ending up there.

            1. I know of one called Ships Coffee Shop that had toasters at every table, but I don’t recall exactly where it was.

              1. I think that might be it. I thought it had a one-word name starting with an “S”, all I could think of was “Skates” and I knew that wasn’t right.

                It had a kinda cool Jetsons color scheme going on.

                1. That’s it. There were 3 of them. Last one closed in ’96.
                  http://www.oldlarestaurants.co…..ships1.jpg

                  1. Now that’s prime Googie.

                2. There was Sam & Ella’s on Melrose. It was kind of funky.

    5. I should add Denny’s to my list of places “I’m better than, but end up in anyway”

      Like Money Mart.

      1. I used to turn my nose up at it, but then I had kids.

        1. I used to eat there but then I scaled back my drinking. POTACHOS have no place in a sober-ish man’s diet.

          1. I would say that 75 percent of The Kettle’s business is non-sober. Which is why they sometimes have bouncers on the weekends.

      2. I could be a freaking billionaire and I’d still eat at Denny’s, at least occasionally.

        They were only one of two restaurants in my college town that stayed open after 9 PM. We’d go there for grub during all-nighter studying sessions, as the other place (a truck stop diner) was too far out of town.

      1. My entire life is McDonalds.

    6. Last time I ate there I had a breakfast burrito with avacado that was pretty damn good.

    7. I use to love getting drunk and eating breakfast at 3Am, smoking half a pack of cigarettes and drinking 4 cups of coffee at Denny’s.

  13. There is still one officer whose verdict hasn’t been rendered, no?

    1. Charges were dropped.

    2. DA is dropping that case because of this verdict.

      1. Let’s face it: DA threw the case, and the judge let him. TANJ.

  14. 108 Degrees in Melbourne…

  15. Guinea pig is on the menu, y’all!

    Of course it could be an April’s fool joke based on the date.

    1. Cavies are just like dogs. They have individual personalities and love to be scratched. I helped slaughter cows and rode pigs for fun as a kid, but I don’t think I could ever eat one of those little fellas.

      1. Yeah, we own two. There’s no way I could eat one.

    2. They were originally domesticated for food.

    3. Guinea pigs were originally domesticated for use as food animals, just like chickens. A lot of people in South America still eat them.

  16. I had an inkling of hope that fat bastard and one-eyed-willy would be found guilty of something. I was not prepared for a full acquittal and charges dropped against the remaining pig due for trial.

    Fuck you California.

    1. It should have been aggravated mayhem, not Murder 2. Still life in prison, which means parole in 7 years, but I’d take it over this shit.

  17. It would be just for these perps to starve to death on the streets as pariahs.

    -jcr

  18. I am shocked that the jury didn’t vote in favor of spending the rest of their life in fear of retribution from the police “brotherhood”.

  19. Where, exactly, was the reasonable doubt here? Dunphy? Even his bs would be hard pressed.

    1. Whatever happened to Dunphy? Did he go back to fucking Morgan Fairchild, inbetween winning surfing and powerlifting competitions and being a rockstar?

      1. He left for greener pastures because you guys acted like assholes. Something I should have done long ago, too.

        1. Please, please, please follow suit.

          1. Forget it Francisco, it’s Tulpatown.

        2. Yes you should have.

      2. I’m guessing he went to try to rescue Groovus Maximus. Although there is a trail of dozens of Ukranian secret police found dead and dismembered, Ukraine is disavowing any knowledge of either of them.

        1. I’m guessing he went to try to rescue Groovus Maximus

          Was he the one who tried to convince everyone that the problem with the world is that people do not submit to the their betters any longer?

          And may or may not have inspired the creation or URKOBOLD?

          1. No, Groovus was the doctor who moved to the Ukraine. He posted for a bit soon after he got there, but has not been heard from since.

            1. Then who am i thinking of?

              Gius Maris or something…

  20. Good to see the citizenry showing proper deference to the Praetorian Guard

    1. Like they have any other choice? Every cop in Orange county knows who the jurors are and where they live. Put those two in jail, their families would be at risk and they knew it.

      1. I agree and disagree. I’m not so sure the entire court wasn’t rigged at the outset which relied on a specific mindset in a group of jurors. The DA was likely in on it. The levels of manipulation within a protective and violent cabal can be quite clever. Proven perfectly by the historical longevity of the violent with access to authority and power.

      2. Put those two in jail, their families would be at risk and they knew it.

        Exactly.

  21. I think this makes a lot of sense dude. WOw.

    http://www.Anon-Global.tk

  22. Only a planned totalitarian strategy or a fool’s court is capable of such incredible injustice. It’s pretty evident at this point that the entire trial was actually designed to acquit brutality and mock public angst. A few steps down the same trail of thought leads to some very Godwin-irking conclusions. If this trial doesn’t showcase how orchestrated power is horrifically unethical nothing will.

  23. The real scary issue people should be asking about is how many violently insane people are running around in uniform, armed and armored, filled with rage and pride against the people they see around them …. only waiting for the right opportunity or encouragement from like-minded officers to take it out on an available victim.

  24. For the tinfoil hat crowd: The case was thrown. The DA defended many, many cops in his prior employment. I believe this was the first time he ever prosecuted one. Many years ago, I was following Irwin Schiff (Peter’s dad) and he recounted a federal tax case for “willful failure to file” or some such nonsense. After the trial and the defendant was found guilty, the jury left very quickly and everyone of them made themselves unavailable for comment. Schiff did some research (I don’t know how he discovered this), and discovered that not only did every member of the jury have prior experience as a juror, something statistically quite unlikely, but that they also had served on a tax case, and since every tax case is won by the govt, the govt had a jury that could be counted on to come to the right conclusion.

    So. I wonder how transparent the jury pool selection algorithm is, and I would be curious if any trial attorneys saw the DAs presentation and tho’t he might have been sand-bagging it.

    The entire chain of command is culpable here, the current chief was Ramos’ captain at the time of the incident, and was certainly responsible for sweeping this under the rug – nothing to see hear, procedures were followed, etc., etc., etc.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.