Skip to main content

View Diary: Mentally Ill Homeless Man Beaten to Death by Fullerton Police (266 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Unspeakable. (25+ / 0-)

    Why did these officers act in such a manner?  Simply because they could?

    Studies have shown time and again, if people are given the power and authority to hurt others, they will eventually execise the power.  If left unchecked,  it escalates.

    In addition to disciplinary proceedings, I hope the police receive psychiatric counseling.

    This is heartbreaking.

    Our promises are made in proportion to our hopes, but kept in proportion to our fears.-LaRouchefoucauld

    by luvsathoroughbred on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 08:14:07 AM PDT

    •  Need to go after the Chief of Police there too (23+ / 0-)

      It's his policies and his methods of law enforcement... or lack thereof... that permeate the police stations.


      I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly, because you tread on my dreams. --William Butler Yeats

      by bronte17 on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 08:22:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree (15+ / 0-)

        While I would very much like to see better video, it is clear that the conduct here was very, very wrong, and incidents of this type generally - not always - occur in departments where there is a failure in the leadership.

        I spent five years as a street cop. Were I deciding charges, every cop who participated in the beating would be charged with manslaughter at minimum, and other cops who were at the scene who did not stop it would be dismissed from the department, again at minimum.

        I am a warrior for peace. And not a gentle man... Steve Mason, 1940-2005

        by Wayward Wind on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 09:37:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Tell us something. If these killers had been (0+ / 0-)

          wearing the colors of a gang other than a city-paid one, wouldyou change this line

          Were I deciding charges, every cop who participated in the beating would be charged with manslaughter at minimum..
          to this?
          Were I deciding charges, every gang member who participated in the beating would be charged with second degree murder at minimum..
          You should know, as an ex-cop yourself, that murder is murder, so your answer will directly weigh on your credibility on this issue and event.

          Mr. President, if you've kept all your commitments to my civil rights, then you never made enough commitments in the first place.

          by davidincleveland on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:26:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The only reason (4+ / 0-)

            I said manslaughter at minimum as opposed to murder is that the information on intent is lacking from what was available in the diary and the linked article.

            A conviction for murder generally requires intent to kill which was not evident in the available information; manslaughter, on the other hand, requires proof of a lesser culpable mental  state, usually recklessness, or proof of intent to inflict an injury short of death.

            If the investigation determined that there was, indeed, an intent to kill (on the part of even one of the cops), then they could all be charged with murder - and should be.

            I am a warrior for peace. And not a gentle man... Steve Mason, 1940-2005

            by Wayward Wind on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 01:48:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I said nothing about CONVICTION. (0+ / 0-)

              cops don't convict anyone, they charge them. I addressed the word you yourself used, which is the correct word for a cop's function. As you very well know, the charge is within a cop's discretion and is part of his job description. onvictions are the province of a jury. Not a cop. Not the DA. Not the judge. A JURY CONVICTS.
              I suspect you tried the old word switch thingy because you didn't want to answer my actual question. Can't say I really blame you; it was a rather mean trick* question.
               You and I both know that a street gang would have been charged with murder routinely, and that cops are hardly ever so charged for this kind of homicide. I was very heavily involved as an activist over the homicide (Cuyahoga County Coroner's finding) by chokehold of Michael Pipkins in 1992.
              Homicide under color of law is a subject I've studied thoroughly. I was one of the main organizers of months-long protests on the steps of City Hall, the writer of our petition [14,000 signatures delivered into the hands of the FBI Agent] requesting a DOJ investigation of a violation of the color of law statute in the U. S. Code, and the guy the other activists sent as their spokesperson/negotiator to deal directly with Mayor Michael White and demand a prohibition of the use of the chokehold by the CPD.
              __________
              * The only answer that wouldn't have left you looking less than progressive was, "You're right. Let me amend my comment to 'a murder charge for anyone in this kind of case.'" Obviously, if you had said you wouldn't have charged the street gang with murder either you'd have been laughed off this thread, because it wouldn't pass the real-world smell test. You wouldn't be allowed to not charge the gang members with murder.

              Mr. President, if you've kept all your commitments to my civil rights, then you never made enough commitments in the first place.

              by davidincleveland on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 08:26:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I did a little research myself (0+ / 0-)

                including a four year degree in Criminal Justice, five years as a street cop, three years of law school, and 15 years as a defense attorney.

                As you very well know, the charge is within a cop's discretion and is part of his job description. onvictions are the province of a jury. Not a cop. Not the DA. Not the judge. A JURY CONVICTS.
                If you think that anyone other than the District Attorney is going to be deciding charges in this case (other than the US Attorney when they get around to the federal civil rights action), then perhaps you need to do a little more research.

                But none of this really matters, since we can all save a lot of time and trouble in cases like this, and simply call you to determine what should be charged, have you render a verdict, and then pronounce the sentence.  All very neat and tidy.

                I am a warrior for peace. And not a gentle man... Steve Mason, 1940-2005

                by Wayward Wind on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 10:16:46 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Cute. We've established dueling bona fides. Not. (0+ / 0-)

                  If that is your whole resume you still can't win a pissing match with me. But eff that bs on both our parts. At this point in my conversation with you only one thing matters to me: Why don't you address the the original unfair question to you? Why don't you force me to acknowledge that I misjudged you, by saying clearly that ALL citizens should be equally charged for the same crime. I believe you probably can't, because you know I will have followup questions as soon as I get you on record. You still haven't responded to the first challenge and you are now evading my restatement. Saying

                  If you think that anyone other than the District Attorney is going to be deciding charges in this case (other than the US Attorney when they get around to the federal civil rights action)..
                  without acknowledging this
                  You and I both know that a street gang would have been charged with murder routinely, and that cops are hardly ever so charged for this kind of homicide.
                  is evasion. My original challenge was on whether you believe that cops and street gangs should face equal charges for the same egregious acts.
                  Despite the unfairness of my question, I had a legitimate purpose.
                  I have been a whole lot more than just an activist. In one of my jobs I had the specific duty to correct and retrain the thinking of cops in the four precincts covered by that job. It was an incidental but not inconsequential duty, in addition to but in support of my main function. I can generally tell a great deal about an ex-cop by what he unconsciously reveals about his blue shield attitude.
                  I consider it important to use such specialized understanding in the service of others who may not know when they are looking at a possible Janus. I believe that knowing one's friends is at least as important as knowing one's enemies. You (I believe) have already answered my question, but since I feel you are evading a direct reply on the record I shall keep my conclusion private from this thread, though not from all other kossaks.

                  Mr. President, if you've kept all your commitments to my civil rights, then you never made enough commitments in the first place.

                  by davidincleveland on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 01:45:08 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Must be nice (0+ / 0-)

                    to be able to accurately assess what happened from one news story and a grainy video shot from 40-50 feet away at night; that, together with your innate ability to read the minds of those involved, must be a great asset when making your judgments.

                    Gang member, cop, ordinary citizen - it won't matter because in order to sustain a murder charge against anybody, the prosecutor is going to have to prove that someone intended to kill the guy.  And that information is simply not available with what has been presented in the diary. These cops have clearly committed a crime, and will pay for their actions, whether the charge ultimately proven be murder or manslaughter, and that is as it should be - for everybody.

                    But you go right ahead and make your pronouncements - don't let the facts get in your way if they don't fit the narrative.

                    I am a warrior for peace. And not a gentle man... Steve Mason, 1940-2005

                    by Wayward Wind on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 04:29:32 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You still haven't answered the question. Now (0+ / 0-)

                      you've been reduced to lying by false implication. Nowhere in any of our exchanges will you  find any statement by me which would permit you to suggest or state that I even have an opinion about the evidence shown to date, because no such conversation has taken place.
                      You are trying to redirect third-party eyes to the non-existent shiny object, so you can get them to ignore that I've repeatedly only asked you one thing: DO YOU OR DO YOU NOT SUPPORT EQUAL CHARGING FOR CRIMES REGARDLESS OF THE PROFESSION (OR LACK THEREOF) OF THE ACCUSED INDIVIDUALS.

                      Mr. President, if you've kept all your commitments to my civil rights, then you never made enough commitments in the first place.

                      by davidincleveland on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 06:22:18 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Reading comprehension problem? (0+ / 0-)
                        If the investigation determined that there was, indeed, an intent to kill (on the part of even one of the cops), then they could all be charged with murder - and should be.
                         You continue to insist that the key question is what these guys will be charged with, when the real question - in this case and every other - is what can be proved in court sufficient to justify a conviction, and the status of the defendant - cop, gangbanger, or otherwise - does not matter.

                        So to answer the question that you pose: it is irrelevant.  The status of the individuals would not matter; the only factor which would matter in charging these guys is what could be proved in court.

                        I am a warrior for peace. And not a gentle man... Steve Mason, 1940-2005

                        by Wayward Wind on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 08:09:33 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I asked you whether YOU support equal charging. (0+ / 0-)

                          My quesion was never framed as a query about the merits of this case, or as a discussion of what could be proved in court, or any of the other bs you've thrown up. My question was directed at how YOU feel about charging cops the same as gang members. I told you in my first comment that I would judge your credibility based on how YOU feel about charging cops the same as 'civilians' and it therefore can't be irrelevant to my purpose, which was to reveal your true character.
                          You have already answered the question over and over, by refusing to honestly and directly engage it. You know very well that if you say you would charge them the same, I'm going to come back with followup questions designed to elicit proof of the truth of your first answer. And if you say you would hold cops to a lower standard, that response would be on DK's servers 'forever.'
                          15 years as a defense attorney should have taught you never to respond to character attacks on the record unless you can refute and shut off the attack with actual evidence that your character is above reproach. Your smart move would have been to ignore my original comment. Once you engaged, you couldn't help but 'verify through evasion' the point I was trying to raise in the minds of the other users on the thread.
                          Here is what I wanted other users to understand. When a cop or ex cop says

                          Were I deciding charges, every cop who participated in the beating would be charged with manslaughter at minimum..
                          ask him or her whether "manslaughter at minimum" would be the charges s/he would use against gang members in the same sort of event, because his/her response will speak to the possibility of a double standard.
                          You knew this, and knew that if you said "no double standard here, I would charge EVERYONE the same," my next set of questions would have been on your actual record in charging gang members and fellow officers. Your responses would be researchable, and by making them you would have waived your right to confidentiality and privacy. You would have done so at a site filled with hundreds of crackerjack researchers, including other lawyers, hordes of paralegals, academics, and Anonymous.
                          Your evasive non-answers have satisfied my suspicions, and probably didn't go unnoticed by others. Thanks for your cooperation. I won't say it's been fun. Exposing the real character of posers in an activist setting is a nasty job but a necessary one, as I found out in the '60s.

                          Mr. President, if you've kept all your commitments to my civil rights, then you never made enough commitments in the first place.

                          by davidincleveland on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 10:28:40 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

    •  exactly correct. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ellinorianne, luvsathoroughbred

      plus police officers do not need much of an education and they get paid like shit.  So you attract pretty crappy candidates in general.  Rarely are cops people who were academically competitive people in high school.  not saying they are bad people but intellectually we are not talking about the best of the best, which is what is required when handing over such power and individual, second by second, decision making.

      •  you dont have to be bright (3+ / 0-)

        you dont have to be top 10 in your class to be a decent fucking human.

        Plus to be honest, police do not want the brightest people, bright people tend to think too much, in police work you follow order, and suppose to follow the law and code of conduct.

        They dont want people out there thinking too much, for if you they do, how could anyone enforce bullshit laws like those dealing with drugs.

        But again,  you do not need to be top of the class to be a nice moral ethical person.

        Bad is never good until worse happens

        by dark daze on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 11:38:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I disagree. (0+ / 0-)

          the military is full of extremely intelligent service academy graduates that operate on the front lines of wars.  If you applied your assessment of the "yes sir" candidate to places like West Point your theory implodes.  

          Take Lynndie England for example.  She grew up in some shit hole part of west virginia, was not bright at all, went in to the military and boom.  She was easily coerced in to doing crazy shit at Abu Ghraib.  We have to recruit better people from teh top down if we expect better results.  This is proven all over the world.

          •  what (0+ / 0-)

            England was just following orders, thats all,  and west point and so forth, have that shit is brain washing.  Sorry it just is.

            Just like boot camp.

            Bad is never good until worse happens

            by dark daze on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 07:47:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  oh (0+ / 0-)

            and smart people, pretty sure they dont go off half way around the world and kill other people just because someone tells them too.
              See thats the problem.

            Smart people understand that things such as " patriotism" is just jingoism used by the rich to get others to do their bidding.

            Bad is never good until worse happens

            by dark daze on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 07:51:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  This is simply untrue: (0+ / 0-)
          Plus to be honest, police do not want the brightest people, bright people tend to think too much, in police work you follow order, and suppose to follow the law and code of conduct.

          They dont want people out there thinking too much, for if you they do, how could anyone enforce bullshit laws like those dealing with drugs.

          You're staining an entire class of hard-working, dedicated people with the actions of a half dozen brutes.

          "Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage." - Confucius

          by IndieGuy on Fri Jul 29, 2011 at 06:21:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  sorry (0+ / 0-)

            simply true.  I know two police chief very well, one a very close personal friend.  They openly admit this.  They dont want dumb cops, but they also dont want egg heads, as they say.

            Bad is never good until worse happens

            by dark daze on Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 07:48:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site