'This Is Freddie Gray on Video': New Haven Man Paralyzed in Police Custody
Randy Cox was arrested on gun possession charges. Hours later, he was paralyzed from the chest down.

On the evening of June 19, New Haven police arrested Randy Cox, 36, on a handgun possession charge. Hours later, Cox was in a local hospital, having been rushed into emergency surgery for a neck injury he sustained in police custody. According to Cox's family and attorneys, Cox is now paralyzed from the chest down, and on a ventilator.
According to New Haven Police Chief Regina Rush-Kittle, New Haven police officers arrested Randy Cox after responding to a "weapons complaint" call. Rush-Kittle says Cox was charged with criminal possession of a firearm, possessing a gun without a permit, and breach of the peace. At 8:33 p.m., body camera footage shows a handcuffed Cox being transferred from a police cruiser to the back of a van. According to a press release from New Haven mayor Justin Elicker, the van, which was not outfitted with seatbelts, was driving Cox to a detention center.
In a video from inside the police van, Cox is seen banging his back on the walls of the vehicle. At one point, the handcuffed Cox lays down on the floor of the van, and repeatedly kicks the door of the vehicle. However, at 8:36 pm—just over two minutes into the drive—Cox got up, and began sitting on a bench inside the van. Around 15 seconds later, the van came to a sudden stop, and Cox flew headfirst into the back door of the van.
At the time of the stop, body camera footage shows the driver, officer Oscar Diaz, appearing to suddenly break and honk the van's horn. An audible 'thud' can be heard in the background. According to Rush-Kittle, Diaz was making an "evasive maneuver" to avoid an accident with another vehicle.
Body camera footage shows that Diaz eventually stopped the van to check on Cox. "What, you fell?" Diaz asked Cox, who replied, saying that he couldn't move. During the encounter, Cox repeatedly told Diaz, "I can't move." Diaz then informed Cox he was going to call an ambulance. Cox, still face-down in the van, told Diaz "I fall. I cannot move my arms." Diaz then returned to the driver's seat of the van, and called an ambulance. He then preceded to drive Cox to the detention center.
While at the detention center, body camera footage shows a team of officers attempting to remove Cox from the back of the van. The officers repeatedly questioned Cox, and appeared to doubt his claims that he "can't move."
"You're not even trying!" one officer says to Cox, after he tells her that he cannot move. After officers drag Cox out of the van the same officer says "You're cracking, you just drank too much"—earlier footage showed Cox's arresting officers refer to him as "under the influence." The officers then placed Cox into a wheelchair, and took him to processing.
During processing, officers continue to appear to think Cox's condition is due to alcohol intoxication. Body camera video shows officers ask him how much he had to drink, and demand that he sit up. When officers began lifting Cox out of the wheelchair, intending to place him in a holding cell, Cox cried out "Oh my god, [inaudible] I fucking broke my neck."
However, officers seemed to take little note of Cox's distress. After dragging Cox into a holding cell, one officer declared "He's perfectly fine," before cuffing Cox's ankles.
According to Elicker, when the ambulance arrived, Cox was taken to Yale New Haven hospital where he underwent surgery on his neck. "Sadly," wrote Elicker in a press release, "Mr. Cox's injury may result in his paralysis and he remains in critical condition."
Civil rights attorney Ben Crump announced on Tuesday that he would lead a legal team in suing the city of New Haven on Cox's behalf. "This is shocking. This is horrific. This is inhumane. We are better than this, New Haven. We are better than this, America." said Crump during a Tuesday press conference. He continued "This is Freddie Gray on video. And all the world is watching[.]"
According to Jack O'Donnell, an attorney representing Cox on criminal weapons charges, Cox is now paralyzed from the chest down, and is currently on a ventilator. "The treatment of him was a disgrace" said Cox's sister LaToya Bloomer on Tuesday. "Where's the person that see's what's going on and says maybe he's not joking, maybe he's not drunk, maybe he's in distress?"
"We can never forget that this is a real life, that Randy Cox's life matters," said Crump during Tuesday's press conference, "We can never forget that."
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
When did Connecticut start letting in blacks?
1619?
"letting" not "forcing". Probably later.
I'm earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four (02-dky) weeks simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join.
Check further details by reaching this link..........
I'm earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four (04-dky) weeks simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join.
Check further details by reaching this link.......... http://payout11.tk
Edumacate yourselfs:
https://westfaironline.com/104859/rediscovering-little-liberia-in-bridgeport/
Also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trowbridge_Square_Historic_District
Is there a previous court decision that cops can't break prisoners' necks? If not, they did nothing wrong.
There is but that happened in a squad car not a van, and also the other case occurred at 8:34 pm. The training didn't cove what is allowed at 8:33
I actually have made $30,030 simply in 5 weeks straightforwardly running part-time from my apartment. Immediately whilst I’ve misplaced my ultimate business, I changed into exhausted and fortunately I located this pinnacle on line task & with this I am in (res-48) a function to reap lots immediately thru my home. Everybody is capable of get this first-rate career & can benefit greater bucks online going this article.
.
>>>> https://brilliantfuture01.blogspot.com/
That seems pretty bad.
>>the van came to a sudden stop, and Cox flew headfirst into the back door of the van
the van *suddenly accelerated* and Cox flew headfirst into the back door of the van?
Don't expect them to understand physics.
can't imagine he'd be chasing the police van on foot.
I actually have made $30,030 simply in 5 weeks straightforwardly running part-time from my apartment. Immediately whilst I’ve misplaced my ultimate business, I changed into exhausted and fortunately I located this pinnacle on line task & with this I am in (res-48) a function to reap lots immediately thru my home. Everybody is capable of get this first-rate career & can benefit greater bucks online going this article.
.
>>>>
I actually have made $30,030 simply in 5 weeks straightforwardly running part-time from my apartment. Immediately whilst I’ve misplaced my ultimate business, I changed into exhausted and fortunately I located this pinnacle on line task & with this I am in (res-49) a function to reap lots immediately thru my home. Everybody is capable of get this first-rate career & can benefit greater bucks online going this article.
.
>>>> http://payout11.tk
Nope. The van suddenly stopped and Cox jumped, head first into the back of the van breaking his own back. That's not the story Reason wants you to read, but that's the story they printed.
At least, personally, probably close to 20 dogs and a couple dozen friends and coworkers in the beds of pickup trucks along all kinds of country roads with all kinds of inexperienced drivers and, somehow, despite people and animals falling out of trucks, falling down in trucks, sliding around in trucks, with all manner of debris and foreign objects, nobody managed to break any bones, let alone their back.
But they weren't handcuffed (at least I hope not). Without hands free it's hard to balance and you can't catch yourself in a fall.
There's clearly a bench in the photo and even without the bench, hours a day having both hands on 50 lbs. of straw wagons rolling (and stopping), no broken backs. Hours spent being bent over with your hands in the tool chest or moving stuff around the bed of the truck no broken backs. The dogs don't even have hands and their spines are naturally aligned with the direction of travel... no. broken. backs.
I did, absolutely, break other people's bones on the football field. Some might call that an occupational hazard, other might say play stupid games, win stupid prizes. I have yet to hear anyone suggest I'm criminally liable for what happened to those people's bones even though I was far more directly involved in breaking them than Diaz.
Ok, so it's never happened to you, so what? Anecdotes are shitty evidence.
From a report in 2000 looking at cases in the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) files for 1987–1996, which identified occupants of pickup trucks with at least one fatality and at least one passenger in the cargo area. "Outcomes of cargo area occupants and passengers in the cab were compared using estimating equations conditional on the crash and vehicle. Thirty-four percent of deaths to cargo occupants were in noncrash events without vehicle deformation. Fifty-five percent of those who died were age 15–29 years and 79% were male. The fatality risk ratio (FRR) comparing cargo area occupants to front seat occupants was 3.0 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]=2.7–3.4). The risk was 7.9 (95% CI=6.2–10.1) times that of restrained front seat occupants. The FRR ranged from 92 (95% CI=47–179) in noncrash events to 1.7 (95% CI=1.5–1.9) in crashes with severe vehicle deformation. The FRR was 1.8 (95% CI=1.4–2.3) for occupants of enclosed cargo areas and 3.5 (95% CI=3.1–4.0) for occupants of open cargo areas. We conclude that passengers in cargo areas of pickup trucks have a higher risk of death than front seat occupants, especially in noncrash events, and that camper shells offer only limited protection for cargo area occupants."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223418718_Fatalities_to_occupants_of_cargo_areas_of_pickup_trucks
And this is only one study.
Seiously, watch the video. The officer stops, honks, applies the appropriate hand gestures, and a car speeds off. Not that the whole thing wasn't staged by the officer, but it's still not at all clear that Diaz's driving in any way caused Cox's injury.
However, the city cheaping out on prisoner transport with no restraints or properly aligned seating IS at fault.
Strike that, there are restraints, so whoever loaded the prisoner is the one at fault for not using them.
I don't know for sure, but I assume the restraints are set up in such a way as to immobilize you or allow you to immobilize yourself. Rather than protecting you from a crash and/or creating a situation where someone who would break their back jumping into the back door of the van could Jeffrey Epstein themselves instead.
They aren't restraints, just straps to hold on to. The reason they are on the bottom (as compared to handholds on a bus) is that the prisoners have their hands cuffed behind their backs, so this way they can hold on. Also it is telling they are saying he is intoxicated at the detention center, as if he were, the proper procedure would have been to not put him in that transport as per their own SOP.
It does seem less egregious than Freddie Gray. But still, how does it seem like a reasonable idea to put a handcuffed person in the back of a van without any seatbelt or other restraints? Even if the driver wasn't being malicious, that's going to be pretty dangerous in an accident or near miss.
Another victim of gun control laws.
We demand common sense van control!
looking forward to all the racist neanderthal "Libertarian" commenters :)))))))))
Yeah, they are thicker than fleas and thieves around here, sad to say...
Looks like the van has seat belts. Why weren't they used?
Don't trust your lying eyes, says right there in the article the van was not equipped with seatbelts. Those are straps for the flotation devices should the van capsize and submerge.
I'm not sure I'd call those seatbelts (though the picture is a bit blurry). Looks like straps to grab with your hands.
RIght. Seems prudent the guy who would jump into the back wall of the van and break his own back not be provided with 4.5 ft. of nylon webbing so that Reason can generate sympathy for him and ire for officers who don't maintain the seat belts well enough to prevent them from accidentally tangling around a suspects neck and hanging them.
How much more tax money do we spend to protect suspects in the back of police vans in case of car accidents?
He didn't jump into the back wall of the van, he fell into the back wall of the driver's compartment. And again no seatbelts. You said you watched the videos, but your comments make me believe you didn't.
Only paralyzed, for being near a gun in the NE US? How did the cops mess up?
Oscar Diaz,
Who's the oppressor when the diversity hire commits brutality against the aggrieved population?
Who's the oppressor when the diversity hire commits brutality against the aggrieved population?
Not that it changes the answer to your question but, see above. According to the facts as presented, the van stopped and rather than Cox's momentum carrying him forward, he leapt head first into the back door. Not necessarily saying that's what happened, just more/most plausible explanation from facts presented. I'm open to explanations up to and including spontaneous inversion of the laws of momentum provided the awareness that, if true, we're gonna struggle to convict Diaz for a near literal act of God.
He hit the back of the driver area, he was kicking at the rear doors earlier in the video. That little grate is so that the driver can hear and see into the back. The fact that a 5th stringer gets basic facts wrong, especially at Reason, is just par for the course.
The odd part is they get facts wrong that destroy the narrative ot they simply present the facts and the narrative and don't give a shit that they conflict.
Even then, there's still a considerable amount of "stupid games, stupid prizes" and other narrative-spinning going on. Watch the video, as they're loading him into the van, they make sure his cuffs aren't too tight, all completely amicable with the "Watch your step." and "Watch your head, my man." pleasantries in conversational tones. It's not like they hog tied him while kneeling on his neck screaming obscenities at him, busted his knees so he couldn't stand up or kneel, and tossed him in the back. There's clearly a bench there and even my 8 yr. old knows "Please remain seated or, if standing, hold on firmly to the handrail for the duration of our trip."
Maybe they should've restrained him, maybe he deceived them (intentionally or not) into believing he could be trusted to sit in the back without extra restraints. Stupid games, stupid prizes. (This is not to say he should've had an unregistered firearm or need to have registered his firearm, just, once in the back of the van for whatever reason, even handcuffed, it's generally not that hard to avoid getting paralyzed.)
He was seated right before the sudden stop. You can clearly see that in the video linked in the article, so I don't know what you are on about here. And is it really so hard for you to believe, especially for someone who claims to have watched the videos, that a sudden stop, while sitting perpendicular to the direction of travel, with no windows to give you any situational awareness, and only straps to hold on to with ones hands handcuffed behind ones back might result in someone banging ones head so hard into the metal wall of the transport to break their neck?
Just to put this in perspective, something like this happened to my wife in high school riding in one of those school buses without seatbelts. Fortunately she did not suffer any spinal cord injuries, but she did break a few vertebrae.
Latinos/Hispanics are very close to being kicked out of the favored BIPOC peoples. 40% of them voted for Trump after all, including probably Officer Diaz here.
Unless the New Haven police force can suspend Newton’s first law of motion, the guy would have slid forward, not backwards, when the van driver hit the brakes (not “breaks” as stated in the article). So if they’re saying he hit the back door and that’s what broke his neck, they are lying.
The poor guy would have been better off dead than paralyzed for the neck down, unable to even breathe on his own. I guess they really don’t take kindly to violating gun control laws in New England.
He hit the back of the driver's compartment, not the back of the van.
Oh for an edit button. Just watch the damn video, it is very clear what happened.
I actually have made $18k within a calendar month via working easy jobs from a laptop. As I had lost my last business, I was so upset and thank God I searched this simple job achieving this I'm ready to achieve thousand of dollars just from my home. All of you can certainly join this best job and could collect extra money
on-line visiting this website.... https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
Cannot fully get why they do not have the people in the back firmly secured to seats.
How about...Don't walk around in a moving vehicle?
And that thing about the vehicle stopping, and him moving backwards? How does that happen?
The article is missing something.
I have ridden in the back of vans. with seating, with bench seating, and without.
I have ridden in the back of u-hauls.
For some serious distance.
All without seat belts.
There is the obvious difference of cuffs but even with that I still cannot imagine a situation short of collision in which a person can get so severely injured.
And then it leaps out Cox banging his back on the walls of the van. Cox laying on the floor and kicking the doors.
And there it is.
The prisoner moved from where the cops put him for the purpose of banging on and kicking the van and was not secured when the van came to a sudden stop.
Had he stayed in his seat, he'd be fine.
I'll simply point out, I don't see BLM protesting this black man who was paralyzed from the neck down thanks to how the police treated him, and that the police are trained, hired and managed by the Democrats that have been running Baltimore since I can remember.
Defund the police, is simply Democrat politicians distracting the public from the fact it's their police abusing blacks, and they're doing nothing about it.
I'd like to add, the police van looks well designed to inflict injury on to prisoners. They didn't fasten him in with a seat belt (isn't that a crime as well?) and it's hard to see how to do so given their right angle metal seats with their hands handcuffed behind their backs. And it sure is helpful to have entirely metal surfaces with sharp corners.
That's the care the Baltimore Democrats take in serving and protecting the public.
Baltimore? This was New Haven, Connecticut. You do have to follow the link to the Washington Post to be sure that it's the New Haven in Connecticut, not the one of the many others, but neither I nor Wikipedia are aware of any New Haven that would be served (in any sense) by the Baltimore police.
This article is unprofessional and carelessly written.
1) Learn the difference between "brakes" and "breaks".
2) Randy Cox did not fly forward into the back door!
3) What is the location? There are at least a dozen towns named New Haven.
4) A little background on the gun arrest would help. Was Cox a convicted felon or domestic abuser, so gun possession was automatically a crime? Or was he arrested under a probably unconstitutional gun registration law?