Police Killed an Autistic Teenager. Then They Filed Search Warrants Looking for Past Bad Behavior.
After Eric Parsa's death at the hands of Louisiana police, officers received approval for search warrants of the teenager's "incidents of violence or documented behavioral reports" at school.

After Louisiana sheriffs killed a disabled teenager, they filed unconstitutional search warrants in an attempt to find unflattering information on the 16-year-old, new allegations in an ongoing lawsuit claim.
Eric Parsa was killed on January 19, 2020, after suffering from "sensory overload" in the parking lot outside a New Orleans-area laser tag center. Parsa, who was "severely autistic," obese, and nonverbal, became distressed and began slapping himself on the head. Later, he slapped his father and bit him. According to the suit, an employee of the laser tag center asked the family if they wanted assistance from police. After the family agreed, the police were called.
According to NBC News, when Parsa slapped one of the Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office (JPSO) deputies who arrived on the scene, the officer wrestled Parsa to the ground, sat on him, and placed him in a chokehold as his parents watched. After nine minutes, Parsa became unresponsive and was taken to a local hospital, where he was pronounced dead.
In the days following Parsa's death, police sought several search warrants related to Parsa—specifically aimed at examining the teenager's in-school behavior. According to recent reporting from The Lens, a New Orleans-area public interest newsroom, police seemed intent on finding past examples of Parsa's violent behavior, specifically asking his school for "all incidents of violence or documented behavioral reports," including a specific request for surveillance footage "relative to any outbursts or violent behavior." Officers even requested that they be allowed to examine certain parts of the school itself for "generalized law enforcement inspection" and "acquisition of documentary photographs." Police also seized Parsa's medical records that were held by his pediatrician.
Despite the legal requirement that warrants only be approved when there is probable cause for a crime, judges in Jefferson, St. Charles, and Orleans granted the warrants. The Lens reports that "none of the affidavits for the warrants that were sought related to Parsa's death identified a specific crime that JPSO was investigating. On some of the warrants, where a crime could have been listed, JPSO wrote 'No charge at this time.' On others, it was left blank."
While deputies later defended the warrants as necessary to conduct a full investigation of the incident, several legal experts weren't convinced. "I'm unclear on why a judge would have signed them," Lucia Blacksher Rainier, a Tulane University Law School professor told The Lens "They knew that they had violated the law and they were trying to find information they could point to that would somehow justify their violation of the law…. That is my guess."
"What is the purpose of the police looking into all this information besides trying to come up with a post-hoc justification for why killing this child was appropriate?" Nora Ahmed, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, told The Lens.
Parsa's parents, who sued police in 2021, are making further allegations of wrongdoing in their suit against the JPSO. They claim that the officers violated the Fourth Amendment by seeking warrants into Parsa's past behavior without probable cause in an attempt to find a post hoc justification for the boy's killing.
"JPSO's admitted use of criminal search warrants without even the suspicion of a crime – much less probable cause – indisputably violates the Fourth Amendment," lawyers for Parsa's parents wrote to a Louisiana federal judge.
While it is unclear whether the Parsa family's lawsuit will prevail, the actions alleged by Jefferson Parish police officers are nonetheless unnerving.
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
Ridiculous. Pathetic. Practicing judo, I have choked dozens of people, some to submission, many until unconscious. Never an issue at all. Wake up just fine.
As police these officers are incompetent in action, irresponsible after, and this particular officer is incompetent at this simple technique taught safely to 15 year olds worldwide.
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> ???.????????.???
9 minutes.
You can knock someone out in a few seconds with a well executed choke. What the hell was the officer doing choking the kid for 9 minutes?
By the same logic that says police officers should be held to a higher understanding of the law than the average citizen, why are the judges who signed those warrants not behind bars?
Even the most deferential position to police can not support leaving required fields (like what crime you're investigating) blank. Screw qualified immunity. It's time to start attacking judicial absolute immunity.
Yeah. The "they should've known better than to choke him out" is almost laughably naive in light of the fact that they got a judge to sign off on a warrant without listing a crime in order to investigate someone they killed (unless they didn't list a suspect and a judge just signed off on blanket snooping on everyone in the school without cause).
The current judiciary is more corrupt than the police. It is a club, one you don't belong too, so you are the one in danger in any encounter with law enforcement.
I completley agree. And yet I understand that the family has their lawsuit before a judge in the very same area, and that judges like cops often have reasonably close relationships, so they are required to strategically not lamabaste the judges horrific and illegal kowtowing to nazi adjecent departments trying to smear a disabled kid they murdered.
Maybe time to defund the police. For real this time. Stop defending them.
And the judiciary.
And all social agencies.
What about the Capitol Police, though? We're not gonna defund them, right? I mean, what with all the attacks they've suffered... the lives lost.
Another chokehold, another death. Didn't they learn from the Garner debacle to stop doing that ?
Next time anyone has a mental health episode and someone asks if you want to call the police, say no and and call the paramedics or fire department instead. The victim just might live through the experience.
I've made $84,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. The potential with this is endless.
Here’s what I do............>>> onlinecareer1
say no and and call the paramedics or fire department instead.
That's what we do.
*This* is the abuse of authority case you are looking for.
NYT appears to have reported on it exactly once, almost a year after the incident.
I suspect the victim in this case isn't sufficiently "melanated" for it to be the case the MSM is looking for.
Honk if you're sick of the autistic.
I'm pretty burned out on mentally ill people, but I don't want them killed.
Fuck you!!
I don't know about the constitutional issues involved, but just as a citizen, I want to know about prior behavior. For example, the media would have us think that George Floyd and Trayvon Martin were saints, when their prior behavior showed them to be worthless thugs.
What does their previous history have to do with their rights being violated today ? Being a scumbag doesn't make you any less protected by the Constitution unless you are doing something illegal when the police show up and "escort you to the ground" and start "compliance striking" you repeatedly with "force implements".
He was doing something illegal, which is why the police were called.
A violent, fat, crazy person should probably not be walking around. Should the police have killed him? No, but something like this seemed inevitable
Agreed. Their are no saints or devils here. The reason to have police with authority to use violence is to deal with people who exceed some limits on behavior.
Wanna debate those limits? Sure. Sitting on a park bench and yelling at squirrels? Probably OK. Running up to little kids in the park and yelling at them? Probably not.
Wanna argue police response? OK. Expect police to be geniuses with flawless insights to human psychology? Wanna pay for that?
Agreed and well said! Now that's about the police.
Judges, now, on the other hand, are supposed to be highly educated, and better than that. The "bosses" of what the cops can and cannot do. And the judges here were clearly doing crap that they should NOT do. The autistic out-of-control asshole is (was already) dead... And now the judges were just trying to cover up, to add insult to injury, and post-hoc justification for the cops killing the autistic SOB. Judges take home the big bucks... Hold them to a higher standard!
OK. Expect police to be geniuses with flawless insights to human psychology?
Most children with siblings, by the age of 10 have learned not to sit on their siblings until they pass out. Nobody expects Crocodile Dundee to show up, hold out his thumb and pinky finger, and lower every last rampaging water buffalo to the ground. Most people do expect a wrongful death case to be treated like a wrongful death case, whether the perpetrator was a random civilian, Kyle Rittenhouse, a social worker or one of the King's Men. And certainly not an investigation of the deceased by the cops looking to defend their actions.
He was doing something illegal, which is why the police were called.
No, he wasn't.
JFC, where were you guys when FL PD hooked a blind guy up for walking without the navigational aid in his back pocket and being a smartass? Nobody died, police actually are allowed to arrest and detain people without charge for 24 hrs., even if the police mistakenly arrested him, they were demoted/suspended without pay. Stupid games. Stupid prizes.
But here someone actually died and the deceased wasn't guilty of destroying any property or attacking anyone who didn't approach him. If you think it takes a genius of a police officer to avoid positionally asphyxiating someone, you're going to get the police protection you deserve.
re: "He was doing something illegal"
No, he wasn't. He didn't have the mens rea necessary to commit the crimes. But in fairness, the police might not have known that at that immediate moment. Nothing about that, however, justifies launching an investigation after they'd killed him.
What does their previous history have to do with their rights being violated today?
Classic Begging the Question. When the assertion that their rights were being violated is in dispute, past behavior is a strong clue about who is telling the truth about a violent encounter with them.
unless you are doing something illegal
Both Floyd and Martin were “doing something illegal” when confronted by those accused of killing them. Floyd was resisting arrest for passing counterfeit money while blasted on illegal drugs; Martin assaulted Zimmerman.
Past behavior is not strong clue, if anything it is hearsay. If this kid was a rampant drug dealer, a ponzi schemer, or an arsonist ... what bearing would that have on whether or not his rights were violated in this instance ? The question being if the officer violated his rights, did he have justified reason for doing so, in which case his action would be excused. At no time does the past actions of the supposed victim figure into the equation. Even if we made if relevant and said that he violently resisted an officer in the past, that still wouldn't have a bearing in *this instance* of police interaction.
The ONLY issues that could be raised in a court matter would be what the officer knew or reasonably should have known about the individual in question. WHether he threw spitballs at Sally last year in school has nought to do with what went down in the car park that afternoon. The pigs are looking to justify their murder, that's all.
READ the US Constitution, Art Four of the Bill or Rights. No warrats shall issu except on probable cause.. means the cops can't request a warrant to search for some action that happened in the past when the actor is dead.
Remember, in Kyle Rittenhause's wacko trial, when the clown that got his arm shot up as he held his own handgun aimed at Kyle's head as Kyle was on the ground being attacked, the court specifically denied any evidence being introduced about that clown's behaviour PRIOR to that night Kyle had no knowledge of what the clown had done last week or last year, the ONLY information he could consider relative to defending himself was what he saw and heard as the incident went down that night. After the alledgedly unarmed Grosskreutz testified he was holding a loaded handgun aimed directly at Kyle's head as Kyle crouched on the tarmac, and only then did Kyle fire upon him (Grosskreutz) the court and jury could then weigh whether Kyle was in mortal danger AT THAT MOMENT and thus whether he had the right to fire upon his assailant. The fact that the clown was prohibited the use of arms because of prior felony charges was inadmissible and irrelevant. (I do note that to date that attacker has not been charged with his illegal possession of that handgun that night.. a felony worth at least ten years in the CrowBar Hotel.
Nope. the dirty coppers are trying to paint their victim as a dirtbag and themselves as innocent angels.
Family need to push back, HARD.
You're confused. The kid is not going to be on trial for anything.
That's ridiculous.
I agree there are cases where prior behavior is relevant. If the deceased or suspect/victim has a habit of calling the police, even baiting them into standoff or suicide by cop situations, that's relevant.
However, if that's the case, that should be a matter of police/public record. Any investigation should, per *everyones'* 4A rights, include the specific materials sought for whom and where, and not just "search everything until you find a crime."
But the search warrant process isn't supposed to be used to determine if someone deserves to be deified. It's supposed to only be used as part of bringing people to court.
So you want to know if they murdered a good guy or a bad guy.
Makes sense.
Begging The Question again. No one has been convicted of murder.
You can't even talk English properly, you Nazi scumbag. Why don't you fuck off to Russia with the rest of your kind?
Nothing shows a true libertarian like blaming the victim of police brutality!
What the fuck are you talking about, Nazi scum? Fuck off to Russia with the rest of your kind.
I think you may have me and my sarcasm confused with the Trump Cult Scum
I may have done, tis true. Poe's law applies, I'm afraid.
The encounter with the murderers (cops and or cvilians) should be judged on the actions and knowledge of the participants at the time. If you walked up to a random person and shot them dead for no reason, would it be relevant to your guilt, if later it was discovered the person you murdered had a bucnh of bodies in the basement?
But that has no resemblance to what happened in this case.
It all goes to proving the point that in the moment, the killers had no idea who they were killing and didn't know anything about the victim's past. Trying to dig up dirt afterwards to somehow justify their murder has absolutely zero bearing on wheter or not this child should have been murdered by statist thugs with badges.
Begging the question again. It has not been established that any murder took place.
An unarmed kid who committed no crime is dead at the hands of a cop. That the cop caused his death is not disputed.
Sounds like murder to me.
OK, what are your crimes? All of them ever? Now, fess up. I need to know so when I call the cops to have you killed, I know what to tell them. That's how this whole system works, right? We decide who's guilty first and either accumulate evidence, then kill them or kill them and accumulate evidence.
Fucking retards.
Apologizing for cops killing kids. The modern GOP in a nutshell. And you wonder why you lose baby lose.
Are you delusional---there is a huge component in the GOP that loathes police overreach (and by the way, the union rules that often prevent accountability).
The judges that issued these warrants are simply horrendous people. Stop for a minute--these guys killed your kid, an autistic kid who deserves nothing but empathy and kindness. And this is what happens. Revolting, and the people in here (likely trolls) yapping about what the kid did so as to slyly justify this outrageous action should try walking a mile in the parents' shoes.
I happened to be involved in a situation when I was in Chicago--a young adult (maybe 17-20) was obviously not all there and harassing me and my children (who were young). His mom was trying to calm him down. All in all a scary/pathetic scene. Now, obviously, had he done anything violent towards me or kids, then that's a problem, but thankfully he didn't. I called the cops, but explained that he didn't appear to be armed and that he looked like he was just out of it on drugs. They sent 15-20 cops and an ambulance. The cops restrained him by each taking one of his limbs. They got him in the ambulance.
Now that's how you deal with someone who is having an episode--with compassion.
Yes, the yappers are disgusting. And I will guarantee that every single one of them is a Trumpie. That's who the trolls are here.
Perhaps, but your guy (I assume) Biden:
(1) smeared some poor truck driver involved in an accident that killed his first wife--he was not drunk
(2) thinks that college students accused of sexual misconduct get no protections
(3) supports the mutilation of children (and euphemizes such mutilation as "gender-affirming care")
(4) allowed the Justice Dept. to prosecute people who found Ashley Biden's diary. Nice to have a Praetorian Guard.
Lol…no, I don’t vote for either of the 2 corrupt parties. Ever. Fuck both your dumb sides.
ok.
Right - it happened in New Orleans - that hot bed of GOP activity. You've lost all perspective - get some help!!
A few questions:
1. Why would you take an autistic kid to a laser tag center?
2. They still have laser tag centers?
3. Why was the warrant needed, since you can't prosecute a corpse? I expect cops to cover their asses, but a judge should have known better.
Yes, obviously, they expect to be sued and they were jumping the gun fishing for information they might be able to use in their defense. Yes, the judges should have known better and should face consequences. Of course, that doesn't mean the boy's past behavior is irrelevant to how we should judge the situation.
Given that our legal system, by definition, seeks to avoid objective truth, I would be shocked that, in the likely event of a civil suit, advocates for the family describe junior as anything but a saint who never hurt a fly. Perhaps the warrants should come later, but if we want anything close to the truth, revealing the kid's history seems obvious.
That's why we have a little thing called discovery. No need to abuse criminal warrants; which is to say the least is a big deal.
WE might want to know details of the kid's past, for our own information. BUT the cops were acting IN THE MOMENT and had ONLY what they knew and could observe then and there. What the kid did last week or last year was NOT part of that incident, and can never be brought to bear in any trial.
But it won't be the kid going to trial. Past behavior of a DEFENDANT is usually not admissible in a trial, but that rule doesn't usually apply to victims.
1. Why would you take an autistic kid to a laser tag center?
2. They still have laser tag centers?
There are a couple of "laser tag center"s near us. Some specifically combat-oriented that I, 100% agree with "Why would you take them there?" Autistic people wouldn't enjoy the experience and likely ruin the experience for other people. Others are more general 'adult entertainment' (the other kind of 'adult'), better described as a bowling alley, sports bar, or go-kart track that also has laser tag. Which, depending on the person and the autism, I could see going bowling or whatever.
1. Because it's fun and because the one thing that most disabled kids want more than anything else is to be treated as normal. Even before the police showed up, it didn't turn out the way anyone intended but you cannot blame them for trying it.
2. Yes - and they're fun.
3. Because even the private information of dead people retains some protections. Also, the requirement for a warrant (theoretically) protects the rights of the institutions who maintain that information - information which is inevitably comingled with the information of those still alive.
But yeah, a judge should have known better than to allow this.
And, of course, the coroner blamed his death on 'excited delirium' - the phony condition that they blame so many deaths upon.
Anyone still using that term in the 2020's should be prohibited from working in the medical profession.
Never call the popo.
Unless the crazy man attacks you, right?
I've made $84,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. The potential with this is endless.
Here’s what I do............>>> onlinecareer1
Apparently there are some crooked judges in louisiana and some petty vindictive crooks for cops. guess what I think need s to be done with the whole group. Hint, they should be required to wear russian uniforms for this.
shiney clean pink jumpsuits would be far more appropriate. Well fitted, of course. The judges rubber stamping those illegal warrants, too. Let them all occupy the came cell block. they're already such great pals...
New Orleans. Democrats. Not surprised.
I'll go out on a limb and bet cash money all the judges signing blank throwdown warrants to help dirty cops launder the murder were placed on the job by the Republican and Democrat entrenched Kleptocracy. Any takers?
Why would anybody voluntarily just give you money? Fuck both parties until they are dead and gone. And then fuck them again.
WHAT does the PICTURE show? Without a caption, what it shows is totally unintelligible, to me. Who are those people? What are they doing?
Those are Republican Faith Healers conjuring the spirit of Theodore Roosevelt to Save their Candidates from the female voters they tried to enslave by packing the Suprema Corte with girl-bullying mystical bigots. The red circle they are kneeling in is the Sacred Circle of Orange-Jesus-Dave where the Faithful kneel to pray for Hellfire and Damnation to turn Libertarian Abortion Planks into Pillars of Salt in a rainstorm.
The kid was white. Nothing to see here. Move on.
The only GOOD cop is a DEAD cop.
They are BLM/Antifa with badges and immunity. The world will never be free until the last one has been strangled after his family has been burned alive.
Oooooh, I get it... bad behavior _of the kid the cops murdered_... NOT of the jackbooted minions themselves. Now the article makes perfect sense. Voters get the government The Kleptocracy taxes them to subsidize; works every time!
Forget this ju jitsu and wrestling. Bring back billy clubs; knee cap him. Arrest complete and he ends up alive and walks with a limp.
The parents should sue themselves. They actually consented to the murder of their son when they consented to police presence.
Weird how regardless of how violent he may or may not have allegedly been at school or wherever else, he was alive until he crossed paths with JPSO. Remember, friends, when you call the police, you are calling an agent with a license to kill.