An independent blog looking at things from a classically liberal perspective. We are independent of any group or organization, and only speak for ourselves, and intend to keep it that way.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Woman Calls Cops on Scam—They Kill Her Dog Instead
The cops are already making excuses for this thug. Here a woman calls the police to tell them that there is an online scam. They say they will send a police officer to talk to her. She tells them she won't be home and to call first so she can be there. They ignore her.
The officer goes to the home, when she is away, and then jumps over her fence ignoring the trespassing signs and warnings that there is a guard dog. When the 11-year-old dog appears he shots it to death.
Police routinely kill dogs. This is not an anomaly. This blog has warned about it repeatedly. I think of the woman who opened her door to a police officer who was lost and asking for directions—yea, they aren't so bright these days. Her dog in the house was barking. She was in the doorway and the dog couldn't get out. The officer pulled his gun and shot her dog inside the house. And, like this officer will, he got away with it. Cops cover for their own.
This is why I argue there are no good cops. The bad cops have allies who lie for them in statements, who destroy evidence on their behalf, and who will exonerate them if they are caught. It is very, very rare that a police member will be disciplined in any way that hurts them. The typical response is "paid leave" while a case is investigated. People in the private sector call paid leave a vacation. Of course, the adrenaline junkies in the police force, who get their kicks throwing around their authority, may actually find that a punishment.
What is particularly upsetting is that the good officers know of cops doing things that are criminal. They rarely turn them in. Cops don't generally arrest cops unless the case is very severe and the evidence hard to hide.
This woman, and her children, have learned that one should never call the police for help, unless it is absolutely necessary. My advice remains:
1. Never call the police unless you are convinced that the risk of their presences is lower than the risk of their not being present.
2. If you see the police in pursuit of someone, go in a different direction. Offer them no assistance and stay as far away from them as possible.
3. Teach your children that the police are NOT their friends. The days of Sheriff Andy Griffith are long gone. The police are not there to protect you or your family, they are there to enforce the law and given the over-legislation of the day, chances are you are a criminal.
4. Teach your children to never speak to an officer unless a parent is present. Cops regularly arrest children for things that rational people don't see a crimes.
5. If your school has a "resource officer" demand that they be removed. Many parents deeply regret the presence of police in the schools when their kids end up in jail for something that shouldn't matter. Kids have been arrested for accidentally bringing butter knifes to school, or for drawing a gun. Kids have been arrested for hugging, small children were handcuffed for crying. Kids were arrested for playing a game where they smacked other kids on the butt and ran. Kids have been arrested for asking a teacher for a hug—and we aren't talking high school boys after a teacher but small children.
6. If you are in a safe position, and see the police in action, and can videotape their activities, then you may save an innocent person from going to jail. Cops don't like this, however, and have arrested people for videotaping them acting illegally. But these tapes have regularly saved people from being railroaded into jail by lying officers, swearing under oath in court. The one greatest help to the innocent has been video which proves the testimony of police officers was perjured.
Watch his video. Now here is the full story behind this scene.
Adam Green started going into a diabetic shock while driving. Police pull him over. He is first ordered to stay in the car but also ordered to get out the car. A Highway Patrol gang member approaches the car with his gun already drawn. The gang member kicks the car window and four of his fellow gang members pull the unresponsive man from the car. He is unresponsive because he is in a diabetic shock.
They pile on the man and begin kicking and beating him while yelling "Stop resisting." Trust me, these thugs will always yell "Stop resisting" because they routinely lie that people are resisting arrest, as an excuse for their thuggery. But Mr. Green was unable to resist. Watch these thugs get their jollies kicking a man who can't move. One kicks him in the ribs. Another criminal in blue kicks him in the face.
You will see them searching through his pockets when one of the officers says, "He's got insulin." You hear one of the mentioning medical and saying the man is semi-conscious. The officer is very concerned if any of the officers, who beat the unresponsive man, were hurt. The officer says: "Let's get medical out here. He's a diabetic. Probably in a shock, semi-conscious." Don't you think this thugs should have tried to determine this BEFORE they beat the shit out of a sick man who did not "resist" and had didn't act violent? Then after they got the adrenalin kicks they laugh about it and the lead thug says, "I could have probably taken him by myself."
Between the city of Henderson, NV, who thugs in blue were involved, and the Highway Patrol, Green was paid almost $300,000 in compensation for the assault on him for the crime of diabetic shock. According to the successful lawsuit one of the officers told Green they were sorry for beating him up. Greene sufferece from bruises, abrasions and broken ribs inflicted by violent police officers to a man who had done nothing more than go into diabetic shock, as the video proves.
The Las Vegas Review-Journal notes that in 2008, Dr. Ryan Rich was diagnosed with a seizure disorder and was on medication for it when he crashed. Police pulled him from his car and saw he was confused and disoriented, a result of the medicine or of a seizure. They used their Taser on him five times and killed him. Count officials said the police attack on Dr. Ryan was justified.
But the adrenalin high that violent police officers work for is clear in the voices at the end. You hear the exhilaration and joy from a gang attack on a semi-conscious diabetic. There is is relief, laughter and pleasure.
As far as anyone can tell all of the violent offenders in blue remain with the police department and none of them suffered any penalties for their violent assault on a sick man. That is typical of how police are treated—they are the only criminal gang that is above the law—they know it, and they act like they know it. Beware, that being in close proximity to a police officer is dangerous to your well being.
Seattle police were raked over the coals by a U.S. Justice Department which found a pattern of excessive force. In spite of that two officers pull this little routine.
According to the police officers two men came to a stop sign and failed to stop, so the police pulled them over. The police report claimed the men almost hit pedestrians crossing the road. But the video shows otherwise. The two Hispanic men stopped at the sign in a full stop and there were NO pedestrians.
Police not only pull the men over on these false charges but immediately begin manhandling them and shouting abusively at them. An attorney says it appears the cops were intentionally trying to bait the men into getting physical so they would have an excuse to rough them up.
Once again a video tape has shown that cops do lie about the people they pull over. They manufacture false accusations against innocent people and get off on being violent and aggressive.
This will continue until we take a zero tolerance policy with police. First, any penalty that applies to private citizens for violating the law ought to be doubled for police officers. They should be held to a higher standard if they are going to be the enforcers of the law. Second, all damages should be paid by the officers and not by the taxpayers—even if this means they lose their homes and doughnut collection. Finally, we have to abolish all laws that are being used by the police to harass individuals videotaping the officers. If we are going to have any law on the matter I would prefer one that says all individuals with cell phone cameras are required to capture all arrests and police incidents they witness and offer the recordings to prosecutors. Now, I wouldn't do that, but if there is only a choice between making such recordings illegal, and making them mandatory, we'd be better off with them being mandatory.
Fascinating. I'm not exactly sure where this is. But, the situation is pretty obvious. Someone streaks across the soccer field carrying a sign. Police tackle him and then start beating him in front of the crowd. First players get pissed at the police brutality and one attacks the police and then people from the stadium descend on the violent cops.
Having seen cops act violently, and having resisted them myself on behalf of others, I applaud this. Police assume they have a right to act violently anytime they want. On most days I consider the police more dangerous to me than criminals. At least with criminals you are legally allowed to fight back.
This is another example of police attacking innocent people violently in violation of the law. Gilberto Powell was walking the half block from a friends house to his home. Gilberto, who has Downs Syndrome, is around 5 feet tall. He called his parents to tell them he was coming home but before he could walk the short distance he was attacked by Miami police officers.
The officers claim they wanted to investigate a "suspicious bulge" in his pants. Who do they think they are? The TSA?
Now, a bulge is not a crime. And it is only "suspicious" if you have that sort of mentality. But suspicion is not evidence and individuals walking home can't be stopped and frisked for no reason other than a police officer's fervid imagination. Gilberto insists he did what the police officers told him to do but that they started hitting him and then pulled the colostomy bag he wears out of his pants.
When Gilberto's parents got outside their son was bruised and beaten and in handcuffs.
I have said it before and have to say it again: treat the police as you would a rabid dog. Do not go near them. Do not try to befriend them. Do not try to help them. If you see them avoid them. They can't be trusted. Sure, some of them are tame, but you can't immediately tell which is which. I have reported before that people who merely opened their door to cops who were looking for an address have suddenly witnessed these thugs pull their guns and murder their dog because it was barking inside the house.
I also urge parents to teach their children to avoid police whenever possible. The police are not their friends either. As I have shown on this blog multiple times, with video, police officers are not adverse to attacking and beating children either. And all it takes is saying the wrong thing to set these criminals off.
I wish this were not the case. I wish we were still in the America where a police officer would help you or try to peacefully resolve any conflict they find. They resort to violence quickly and with little rational forethought. And the results are that a lot of innocent people get hurt.
I am an adamant opponent of tasers. Tasers regularly kill people, in spite of the bogus claims by the "industry" that they are safer. Well, compared to trigger happy joyboy cops, a taser is safer. Better yet stop the joyboys from getting their rocks off with their adrenaline kicks. That is even safer. These cops, because tasers are allegedly seen as safer, are quicker to resort to them.
In this case please note that eyewitnesses said the main in question did not act violently or do anything to warrant the taser attack. The police claim he didn't fully stop at a stop sign. Cops love that one because there are almost never cameras to prove them wrong. It is an easy accusation to make to justify any stop.
Next they say the man did NOT stop until he pulled into a parking lot. I have driven the area in question. This is a very mountainous region of California with roads that wind in every direction, with little space to pull over. I have been to the Valero station in question, after getting lost on this roads once.
Any driver would find it difficult to impossible to immediately pull over unless they luck out and are in just the right spot at the right time. I know that I got hopelessly lost for awhile in the area and just trying to find a place to turn around would sometimes mean driving for a mile or two extra. Allen Kephart pulled over and stopped in a safe place, as opposed to unsafely doing so on a curving road with little to no shoulder. He did the sane thing, as opposed to the insane power junkies that attacked him.
They pulled him out of his car and threw him violently to the ground. That is assault. They then tasered him to death. That is murder. What happens to the thugs? They are still in their jobs probably having a good laugh about how they taught those yokels to respect their authority.
Also note that eyewitnesses said that people who video taped the incident had their telephones confiscated by the police. Once again the police are routinely destroying evidence that could be used against them. It ought to be a crime for any police officer to confiscate a taped recording of his actions. Every cop should be under video surveillance because that is what you do with dangerous people, you keep an eye on them. That they confiscate such video recordings itself is indicative that they KNOW they are acting like a violent gang. They know it, so they destroy the evidence that proves it.
Still don't think cops are dangerous to good people?
Jesse Kersey, 17, is mentally challenged. And like many with this problem he has a speech impediment. He was outside his house riding his bike when a gang member, also called the police, stopped him to question him, apparently for no reason at all. Perhaps the thug in blue just wanted to throw his weight around. The criminal, by the way, goes by the name of Officer Willie Hooper. Willie? Really? What is he, 10-years-old?
Well, Officer Willie couldn't understand what Jesse was saying and said that made it disrespectful. By the way, you are not required to respect the police by law, that includes clownish buffoons named Officer Willie. Office Willie's little, tiny, immature ego (you didn't think I was going to the other place) was bruised. The poor baby was devastated and lost his temper and started screaming at this retarded boy. The boy, given his disability, didn't understand what was going on. But then with mental cases like Officer Willie even fully mature, totally rational people, would have trouble understanding what was going on. Officer Willie need a rubber, well, a rubber room and some medications to sedate him. After that he needs a nice warm jail cell.
A neighbor witnessing the insane police officer throwing his toys out of the cot tried to tell him that the boy is retarded and can't speak properly and didn't understand what was happening. Well, adrenaline junky Officer Willie was already high on his own exaggerated powers, threatened to arrest the neighbor and ordered him to go back into his house. This is man who is clearly unstable emotionally and impervious to reason. He needs a straightjacket not a badge and a gun.
Jesse did what most kids, especially those with developmental issues, would do. He ran to his mother for help. His mother, Pamela Ford, opened the door of her home to see what was going on. She then witnessed the maddened Officer Willie, and his partner in crime, Officer John Howard, fire tasers into the frightened boy. Tasers are deadly weapons and routinely kill people.
Jesse did not commit a crime. He was not a suspect in a crime. He was being questioned by a power-hungry thug. He is a minor, who, if questioned has a right to have a parent present. He is mentally challenged and doesn't understand what is going on. He doesn't know that cops are dangerous to all peaceful people. He doesn't understand that many of them, like Officer Willie, are mental cases who get their rocks off by hurting people and ordering them around.
By now the thugs were in a feeding frenzy. Ford and a family friend, Christopher Peyton, kept telling the officers that Jesse was retarded and handicapped and had no idea what was going on. But who would when facing an enraged, irrational, wild animal?
The officers responded to this information by using pepper spray on the boy and punching him multiple times. Of course, the fuckwads called for back-up so 20 of their fellow brother thugs descended on the house. Numerous people continued to plead with the officers and tell them they were beating up a retarded kid! They didn't care.
They handcuffed the boy and tossed him into a police car and then went in their Newspeak mode. The boy, who was a victim of a violent assault, was charged with assaulting a "peace officer." This is not a peace officer by any means. And Jesse didn't assault the police, they assaulted him. Typical of how cops twist things to mean their opposite. He was charged with resisting arrest. That means running to his mother for help. And he was charged with "obstructing official business." These are catch-all accusations that police routinely throw at someone when the police are in the wrong.
Jesse is taken to court and the judge says he's mentally incompetent to stand trial and dismisses the charges. If the boy was mentally incompetent to defend himself in court, then he was mentally incompetent to be subjected to an illegal police interrogation. Dayton and little Willie are being sued, as should be the case. But Officer Willie and Co., should be removed from duty, without pay. Criminal charges should be laid against them and, if convicted, they should be sent to jail. In addition, Willie and friends should individually be required to make financial restitution to the boy they assaulted
Here are the facts as described in the legal suit brought against Willie and the City of Dayton. The police of chief in Dayton seems to hide his email address. I urge you to send an email to Mayor Gary Leitzell instead. His email is gary.leitzell@daytonohio.gov. As always be respectful to the mayor but demand the removal of Hooper and Howard from the Dayton police force as threats to public safety.
The guilt or innocence of the young man being arrested is immaterial to the horror that we should feel when we witness these Houston police officers acting in this manner. It is clear that the young man laid down on the ground with his hands on the back of his head, the precise manner that police demand when they want to arrest or harass someone. He is clearly NOT posing a threat to these officers. But these vicious cops go into a feeding frenzy kicking him repeatedly and punching him, even though he never once raises a hand to the police.
These men in uniform are acting precisely like a criminal gang, a pack of wild thugs bent on anti-social violence. And that is how they should be treated. Each of these officers should be immediately fired. Second, charges of assault and battery should be brought against them. Given the brutality I'm not sure attempted murder charges aren't warranted. None of them should receive pay or benefits while their criminal behavior is being investigated—they should not get a paid vacation for being thugs. Each should be tried for their crimes and they should be convicted, sentenced, and imprisoned.
Given the responsibility that police officers have to the law I believe the penalty for police officers, engaging in violence like this against the public, should be far more severe than normal. Police officers have powers denied to most people and given that they are the law enforcers we ought to have zero tolerance when cops break the law. And they ought to be punished far more severely than member of the public. Unfortunately, given the corrupt nature of police in America, and their tendency to engage in violence, they are still too likely to get away with their crimes.
Here is what we know. The individual being attacked by the police is 15-years-old. Houston public officials tried to keep the video from the public, admitting that it was disturbing and using that as the reason for hiding it. If it were not for a security camera at a storage building the incident would have gone unwitnessed, and I would bet you doughnuts, appropriate in this case, that the police officers would have told a unified story that completely contradicts the facts.
This incident took place in March but the video was only recently obtained and released to the public, against the wishes of the police department. Officers have been charged with misdemeanor assault but surely what they did rises to felony level. They were suspended without pay (bravo) and seven of them were fired, but only four face official charges, which doesn't seem right from my viewing of the video.
This is disgusting. That it takes place in Canada at least give me a smidgen of hope that the cops will be dealt with and punished for their criminal assault on a handicapped woman.
You can see that this woman has cerebral palsy (some reports say multiple sclerosis) and has trouble walking. Three fat cops decided to take up the sidewalk by walking side-by-side expecting the peons, who they are used to ordering about, to move out of their way. This woman has trouble getting around them and tries to walk between them. So the one thug in blue reaches over and shoves her to the ground. He and his fellow "officers" then walk past without bothering to see if the woman needed any assistance.
Yes, I think the pig that did the pushing should spend some time in jail for assaulting this woman. That she was handicapped, as far as I'm concerned, ought to mean his sentence is enhanced for assaulting someone so vulnerable. In addition the other officers should be discharged immediately as well. They were present when a police officer criminally assaulting a handicapped woman merely because he thought she was in his way. That is a crime. They did not arrest the officer committing the assault nor did they report him. They are accessories after the fact to the assault and should be punished as such. I absolutely believe that police officers should have less leeway in how they act than does the public. They are supposed to represent the law and as representatives of the law they ought to be held to higher standards.
Let us look at how Officer Thug excused his monstrous behavior after he realized he was caught on tape. Constable Taylor Robinson said he was sorry and that he pushed the woman to the ground because he thought she was trying to take his gun. Sure, that's the ticket, she was going for his gun. If you buy that I've got a virgin birth to sell you.
Here is what is wrong with that puny excuse. If he thought she was going for his gun then why didn't he arrest her? The fact that he didn't arrest her, or even try to do so, is because he knew that she wasn't going for his gun. He could pretend he only realized his mistake after he pushed her to the ground and that is believable except for the fact that he then refused to help her up.
His action betray his excuses. If he thought she was truly going for his gun he should have arrested her. If he realized she wasn't going for his gun then he should have apologized and helped her to her feet. Instead he shoved her to the ground and walked away indicating no concern that she was either a gun-stealing criminal who needed arresting, or a handicapped woman who needed assistance.
The most consistent theory is that he felt she was in his way, didn't believe she was going for his gun, pushed her to the ground because he is a thug and didn't help her up because he meant to push her to the ground. But, he then discovers the whole incident is recorded on tape and he has to make fancy excuses to cover up his own criminal actions against a handicapped woman.
He only reported the incident hours after it happened, and I bet after he learned it was taped. Let's see if Vancouver does the right thing and fires the officers and brings them up on criminal charges of assault and battery.
Here is a second video to remind you that wild animals can be as dangerous as cops.
Murdering, raping cop protects students by beating them.
I have long opposed putting cops into the schools. Cops are dangerous and should be avoided. Watch this news story. Here is a special ed student who was beaten violently by a police officer for not having his shirt tucked in—that's it. If you think that's bad, wait until you hear the rest.
The Dolton Police Department was reluctant to release the name of the officer involved, Christopher Lloyd. The police officer "has a troubling history that includes killing a man in a case of disputed self-defense and is now in an Indiana jail for an unrelated rape charge." What a peach! Here is more: "According to Lake County, Ind., court documents, he [Lloyd] held a pillow over the woman's face while sexually assaulting her Sept. 14 and had previously threatened her with a knife." He is also facing a lawsuite from his ex-wife who says Lloyd "gunned down her new husband Cornel McKinney in front of their children outside their home on Feb. 17 2008."
Yet, it appears that Lloyd had no problem finding a job with the police, where he got to beat up kids for the crime of having an untucked shirt. Here is another video from security cameras at the school, see if the boy in question acted in any manner worthy of a violent beating.
Chicago Police never pressed charges for the killing saying it was self-defence. But get this, the dead man was shot 24 times, according to an autopsy. That means Lloyd emptied an entire magazine of bullets and reloaded to continue shooting. That is not self-defence, that is someone acting with anger and hatred. To say Lloyd has "anger management" issues would be an understatment. Yet the police felt comfortable putting this man into the school system.
Dolton is facing a heavy law suit and in my opinion the award ought to come out of the police budget starting with the salaries of chief and other top offices and working down from there. These sorts of violent antics by thugs in uniform are all too common. Another reason to home school, or seek out private education, is to get you kids out of the way of violent cops. Government youth-holding centers, once called schools, are not the place to get an education as this poor boy learned. My view is that one should look at police officers as members of a well-known, violent gang, who happen to have "Get Out of Jail" cards in their pockets. The rest falls into place from there.
Dangerous underwear dancers arrested: Atlanta saved.
The police attack on the Stonewall Inn, in 1969, is credited with the start of the gay rights movement in the United States. It was the first time that gays fought back and the police were horrified. The police like to pick on people especially if they feel the people won't fight back. The cops also like to use their power to indulge their own small-minded prejudices and bigotry. And it isn't just gays that they attack.
A few weeks back the Fort Worth police, in conjuction with agents from the liquor authority, attacked a gay bar. They swarmed into the bar in force and started cuffing people. One man was thrown to the ground and suffered a brain concussion that hospitalized him in serious condition. The police claimed it was because on a previous night people were seen leaving the bar who police thought might be drunk. Really? Drinking? In a bar?
Patrons made lots of accusations which the police and liquor authority denied. Alas evidence later came out that pretty much showed that the cops were liars—you would think that this was assumed given the reputation of American police officers for being dishonest, bigoted and violent. The liquor authority ended up with egg on its face and admitted their agents had falsified statements and acted in ways against departmental policy. The ruckus in Fort Worth just died down. So now the police in Atlanta engage in something similar against a gay bar there, although not quite as violently.
Once again the charges the police concocted are less than convincing. First the police claim that the raid against the patrons of the bar was done at the behest of the patrons of the bar. They claim customers of the bar filed a "volume of complaints." In another statement the police said they received "several complaints with descriptive information about alleged criminal conduct" in the bar. Remember this is the American South so "criminal conduct" could be something as dangerous as offering to sell someone a dildo. Georgia is infested with Jesus-addicts which means the legislation there particularly intrusive in people's private lives. Moralists tend to want a state as omnipotent as their alleged deity.
In another statement police claimed it was "illicit sex" that was what they putting a stop to. Good thing, I feel safer already. But elsewhere they said they were after drugs. I sincerely doubt that any actual complainants will ever be identified. Why? Because when cops want to justify a particular action they take against a particular place or person they invent such complaints. They will refer to them as the reason they had to take action. The cops invent the complaints and then act on them.
In one statement police claimed that police officers "observed criminal behavior taking place" but, they don't explain what behavior or why those "criminals" were not arrested. The police then absurdly claimed that their actions against dancing is to "deter criminal activity in order to create a safe environment." Safe? From what? Dancing? For the record, I don't feel unsafe because people dance. I do feel unsafe anytime a cop is within 200 feet of me.
Of course, anonymous complaints about "drugs" in any establishment that caters to the clubbing scene (gay or straight) which has a significant number of people present at any time, is likely to have someone there who has some illegal drugs on them. I would bet if you searched the purses of every Jesus-monger at a large Baptist Church you would find some illegal drugs along the way as well. No particular individual was being targeted, which means the police had no information about any specific drug dealing going on at the club. But they raided the club and then searched every single patron in the hope of finding some illegal drugs to justify their attack.
The problem was that they didn't find any. Personally I consider that a miracle. These days you couldn't search a cub scout pack without finding drugs. But according to news reports "no drugs were found, and none of those arrested face narcotics charges." That has to be embarrassing.
Update: Atlanta police are having a damn hard time keeping their story straight. The latest report I've read now have the police claiming that the complaints came, not from patrons, but from neighbors. A check of the satellite photos from Google show almost no neighbors at all. The building adjacent to the club is vacant. On the other side is a parking lot. Across the street is a park. A doughnut shop is half a block away. And now they claimed it "public sex" that was the criminal act, not drugs as they previously claimed. But they still haven't explained why no one was ever arrested for the crime that the cops claim took place.
In yet another version a spokeswoman for the department says that there were two complaints, one each at two different "tip lines." Anyone want to bet the same person made both calls? The anonymous caller claimed that Thursdays were "sex night" at the club. And, even more bizarre is the claim that the club took loud speakers and pointed them toward apartment buildings a distance away "playing sounces of gay men having sex." However the local "Security Alliance" of businesses and residents in the general area says that they did not initiate the complaint and "we never have received any complaints, reports, or observations about criminal activity in any way associated with the Eagle. The spokesman said: "I have spent much time on the streets of Midtown, and look under every rock to identify problem spots. Eagle is not one of those problem spots, and we have always considered the Eagle to be a good neighbor."
My guess is the one demented individual made up all these accusations, made both calls to two different lines, and then relied on the natural bigotry and thuggery of the police department to do their work for them. In essence, the police were fag bashers by proxy, which doesn't mean they wouldn't have enjoyed the task on their own.
So why was the staff of the bar arrested? That evening the bar sponsored an "underwear" party. This meant some people were dancing in their underwear. Good lord, underwear today tends to be less revealing than the swimsuits of my youth-when Speedos were the fashion. Mark Spitz posed in less for his famous Olympics photo. However, the creative thugs in blue, argued that people dancing in underwear is "adult entertainment" and the bar was not licensed for "adult entertainment." No doubt the morons in Atlanta's police department would say the following video is thus hard-core pornography.
For the record, a quick search on Youtube shows over 10,000 vidoes posted by criminals showing themselves dancing in their underwear. It is my suspicion that none of these dangerous criminals were in possession of a government license allowing them to so dance.
Press reports say the police literally searched every person in the bar. Exactly what "reasonable cause" did they have to conduct searches on every person in a business? Apparently anonymous drug complaints, or sex complaints (they haven't gotten their story straight yet to decide which one they will use). Of course this is the same police department that manufactured a false statement to a judge in order to secure a search warrant on an elderly woman who lived alone. The police lied about the circumstances completely and then conducted an armed raid on the woman's home where she was killed. Only because this old woman died was a thorough investigation done and it was proven that the cops had lied throughout the process and had no reason to raid the woman's home. They claimed an anonymous tip told them it was a drug dealers house. Liars!
According to the reports I've read about a dozen or more police officers swept into the bar and forced all patrons to lie on the floor. Each individual was searched for the non-existent drugs. And staff members were carted off to jail for allowing patrons to dance in their underwear. In addition to the dozen or more uniformed officers it is believed that ten other officers were inside the club in plain clothes. So they had 10 officers inside. Notice that no one was arrested for any of the crimes used as an excuse to raid the bar. No one was arrested for "illicit sex" and in Georgia that doesn't take much. No one was arrested for possessing or distributing drugs. And the only "criminal activity" the police officers could find was people dancing while wearing underwear—no nudity even.
Patrons who were inside said that after the first search, which turned up NO drugs, the police then searched most the patrons a second time—in the hope, no doubt, of getting lucky and justifying the "complaints" they invented. One patron said: "I was held in the bar for over an hour; they were going through and searching people. They tore the bar apart. They searched the cash register, they searched the ice machine they were ripping things off the walls. It was ridiculous. They were in full SWAT gear." I bet as the searches progressed, and no drugs were found, the police got more and more desperate. They just assumed that searching enough would turn up somebody with drugs. Whoops! Didn't happen and instead they were caught making up tales to justify their thuggery.
For the Atlanta police this is a step toward civility. At least they were murdering old ladies this time. But they did get some dangerous people who were dancing without a permit. Fuck! Really, do we need these assholes? The honest truth is that I'd rather take my risks with criminals than cops. The criminals aren't as violent and they don't have the politicial system trying to protect them. If I shoot a criminal who attacks me it's called "self-defense." If the criminal is wearing a cop's uniform is called assaulting an office and usually brings about the death penalty inflicted on the spot, without judge or jury.
This video seems to show a man who was peacefully standing on corner while engaging in one of his favorite activities, walking around his own neighborhood. A police cruiser pulls up. A police officer orders the man to zip up his jacket. He does. Then, with no aggressive, or illegal acts by the man a second police officer attacks him with a nightstick beating the man repeatedly.
A local surveillance captured the incident. This blog stands by its claim that the police are dangerous criminals and that law-abiding citizens should avoid them whenever possible. The numbers of innocent people attacked by this power-hungry gangs in blue are legion. Don't be one of them. Warn you kids, the cops are not their friends. Don't speak to police officers unless spoken to and then only respond politely, they are easily provoked and will attack and then will lie about the incident afterwards.
This video speaks for itself.
Our second video needs some explaining. An ambulance was rushing a woman to the hospital with sirens going. A police car, also with sirens going was gaining on the ambulance. The driver of the ambulance did not hear the second siren, understandable given he was in a vehicle with its own siren. The ambulance was trying to pass a car when the police vehicle caught up with it and didn't see the police until that moment. The cop, upset that the ambulance didn't give him the right away immediately pulled the ambulance preventing it from taking the woman to the hospital.
Other thugs from the local police showed up to put the squeeze, literally, on the ambulance driver. After all we know what ruffians ambulance drivers tend to be and how gentle and caring your typical law oinkifer is. Here is the video taken by the son of the woman in the ambulance. The local prosecutor says no charges will be filed against the officer. Of course not! They are above the law. They are obsessed with their own authority. I can only guess they suffer from some sort of deficiency which causes them to become aggressive and violent. Don't want no short.... around here.
As I read various newspapers in general I keep coming across new stories of police abuse. They aren't hard to find. In this case Mesa, Arizona, police officer Nicholas Webster arrested a drunk man on "suspicion" of public urination and jaywalking, late one night. He claims he used violence against the man because the handcuffed man tried to "head-butt" him. Unfortunately surveillance videos show otherwise.
As an aside, why is it that video of various incidents with police officers indicate that the officers lie so often in their official reports and in court. Considering how often these videos prove the officers to be liars, exactly why would any sane judge or jury take the testimony of a police officer as being trustworthy? Surely, the accumulative evidence shows just the opposite.
Webster claimed, in his report, that the man made an aggressive move in his direction and that all the police officer did was deflect that. The video, instead, showed that the officer first gabbed his victim, Sean Okoli, by the neck and slammed his face into the read windshield of the police vehicle. In other words, Webster is dishonest, forged a police report, and possibly lied under oath.
Video proves cops lie, nothing done to them, of course.
Joshua Ortiz was arrested for assaulting a police officer. The official police report, from Officer Derek Lade, claimed:
Ortiz (arrestee 1) exited the elevator and began yelling at all three officers (leave them alone). I turned to Ortiz and instructed him to get back into the elevator and go to his vehicle. Ortiz began to yell and curse stating (He did not have to go anywhere). I then walked to Ortiz and met him at the entrance to the elevator. I advised him he needed to leave because he was not part of the incident. Ortiz continued to yell at me and then walked right up to me hitting his nose to my nose. At that point I struck Ortiz in the chest with a double handed palm heal strike sending him to the rear of the elevator facing away from me. As I approached Ortiz to take him into custody, Ortiz swung around to face me and assumed a fight stance (both left and right hand clenched into fists and body bladed).
As soon as Ortiz assume a fighting stance, Officer Smith struck Ortiz in the face with a discretionary blow. We both then attempted to take Ortiz into custody. Ortiz began to violently pull his arms away trying to defeat us handcuffing him. As we were struggling with Ortiz, Officer Silver arrived and was able to take Ortiz down to the ground with a leg sweep.
Officer Smith then wrote his own report verifying that Officer Lade was telling the truth. He similarly claimed: “Ortiz aggressively stood his ground and took a hostile step forward with clenched fists and made contact face to face with Officer Lade.”
Joshua Ortiz, the alleged criminal in the case, complained about the way police handled him and what was done. He claimed he was attacked. The Fort Lauderdale police department claimed they investigated the case and said that the officers were just fine gentlemen who had done nothing wrong and that Ortiz was at fault. No disciplinary action would be taken against the two officers. Ortiz was facing a court date for felony battery against a law enforcement officer (these thugs get special protection).
But Stephen Melnick, the defense attorney for Ortiz secured a surveillance tape from the elevator. Watch it above. I have watched it three times and it sure doesn’t appear to match the written, sworn claims by two police officers. Both officers said Ortiz went after Officer Lade and pushed his face straight into Lade’s face. You can watch the tape and you don’t see it. It didn’t happen. The descriptions given by both officers, while identical, did correspond with film of the actual incident
One might argue that a police officer can get “confused”. Of course, in court they claim to have vivid and clear memories. If confused, an officer might misremember something as happening that never actually happened. It is possible, though I suspect unlikely. But for two officers to misremember and both claim that Ortiz pushed his nose against the police officer’s nose is astounding, amazing, and unbelievable. Two officers, from different viewpoints, having almost the precise same story, but a story that isn’t true, are not misremembering. They are lying. In addition, since they are both telling the same lie it means they engaged in criminal collusion to lie in a legal case against a member of the public.
If you read the police report there is a sworn affidavit at the bottom which says that the officer swears or affirms “that I have prepared this report and that it is correct and true to the best of my knowledge.” Office Smith even had his signed by another police officer claiming that Smith “did take an oath” that the statement was true. Of course, as the film footage shows, both officers lied when they signed that statement.
When the footage of the actual incident proved the cops were lying charges against Ortiz were dropped. The assistant state attorney in the case, Lee Cohen, said, “We thought based on the facts and the evidence, including the videotape, that there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction at trial.” In other words, the prosecutor didn’t think a jury would believe the cops either.
According to the Sun-Sentinel, city records show multiple complaints against the police for the use of force, “But in the last eight years, not one of those citizen complains was upheld by investigators, or led to discipline of an officer.” Even though the tape showed the officers falsified a police report and that they assaulted Ortiz, not the other way around, they were found completely innocent by police investigators. A police spokesman, Sgt. Frank Sousa, says that the fact that the police have never ruled against one of their own officers proves “the officers are doing their jobs the way they’re supposed to.” Perhaps, but in this case the tape show that not to be the case. It seems more likely that what this shows is the police will do their best to avoid disciplining one of their own officers for assaulting a member of the public and falsifying police reports. What it shows is a culture of cover-up among cops.
Here is a CNN report on the same incident with some additional footage. The police spokesman plays down the incident. He was the center of a controversy himself when a tourist taped him beating someone up earlier.
NFL player, Ryan Moats, was rushing to the hospital with his wife Tamishia, whose mother was hospitalized and about to die. Moats stopped at a red light by the hospital, when traffic was cleared he went through the red light because it was believed that his mother-in-law would die any minute.
Dallas Police officer Robert Powell saw this and pulled up to Moats in the hospital parking lot. Moats and his wife tried to explain they were rushing to the bedside of the dying woman. Office Powell was more interested in exerting his authority. At one point the officer pulled his gun and told the family that he can “screw you over”. He pointed the gun at the distraught Tamishia. Moats and ordered her and another female relative of the dying woman to get in the car. Mrs Moats and the other relative instead ran for the hospital door.
Even when a second police officer confirmed that Moats and his relatives were telling the truth Officer Powell didn’t care. Moats yelled” My mother-in-law is dying! Right now! You’re wasting my time! I don’t understand why you can’t understand that.” Powell told Moats: “Shut your mouth. You can either settle down and cooperate or I can just take you to jail for running a red light.” Compassionate dude!
Video of the incident, according to Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle, shows that Moats “handled himself very, very well.” Powell, however, issued one threat after another. He told Moats that he could have his car towed and that he could arrest him and jail him for running the red light during this emergency. He hinted that he could make things very bad for Moats if he didn’t obey and stop talking: “I can screw you over. I ‘d rather not do that. Your attitude will dictate everything that happens.” What precisely did he mean by “screw you over?” For the record, Tamishia’s mother died while Moats was still being held in the parking lot by the arrogant police officer.
A video of the incident is above. Of course Officer Power is on paid vacation, or “administrative leave” as the matter is investigated.
One of the great virtues of the presence of cameras, when not monopolized by the state, is that more and more police officers are being caught in their lies. It has been routine for these uniformed criminals to beat people and then lie if complaints are laid. Their fellow officers will routinely lie on their behalf and they are regularly exonerated by the force which proclaims that these thugs in blue have done nothing wrong -- all testimony by eye-witnessess not withstanding.
Today the cameras are catching the bastards.
In this first incident, we see a police officer, off-duty, who is drunk in a bar. The woman bartender tells him she can't serve him more booze because of his intoxicated state. So he beats the shit out of her. The Chicago police department is now trying to fire him. But if the tape didn't exist would they take this action? All we have to do is watch what happens to cops when tapes don't exist—nothing.
One of my readers here alerted me to the second incident above. A girl took her guardian's car and went for a ride with a friend. According to press reports what happened was the police officers arrested her and her friend and took her to jail. She was ordered to remove her shoes and kicked off the shoes. One of the shoes apparently hit the fragile officer in the shin. He immediately entered the cell of the 15-year-old, Malika Calhoun, and beat her up.
This violent cop was involved in two shootings that killed people in the past. No film of those incidents ever surfaced and he was cleared of all wrong-doing, as might be expected by the police department.
In one incident, the police officer, Paul Schene, claimed the man was "on something" and acted like he was drunk or high. The autopsy showed that was not the case and Schene was lying. But never mind that, he's a cop so he got away with it. The man in question was clearly ill and had vomited in front of the officer. An altercation took place and the man attempted to flee away from the police officer. Schene shot the fleeing man in the back and the head eleven times on the premise that he could have been going for a weapon—no weapon was found.
The police report filed by Schene and his fellow officer claimed that the shoe caused "bruising, bleeding and pain" which I suspect is just more police bullshit. What is worse is that Schene was a "field-training officer" teaching the other deputy how to act like a cop. At the moment Schene has been put on paid vacation—they call it "suspended with full pay". The world is filled with billions of people who would like to be "suspended with full pay."
The reality is that cops often think they have the right to act this way and that they are above the law. One of the great problems with policing is that individuals attracted to the job are often prone to visions of grandeur, authoritarian in nature, and love violence. It is the authority and right to act violently that they find attractive. In other words, many of them are psychologically unfit for the job.
Cop tries choking to get evidence that doesn't exist.
The people at StoptheDrugWar.com posted this news report regarding a police officer who arrested man who was believed, by the officer to have marijuana. The cop couldn't find the marijuana so he then assumed the man was swallowing it. To prevent this the officer then began chocking the man, who was restrained in handcuffs and who didn't try to fight or resist in any way.
It is bad news when cops think they have the right to choke restrained individuals period. And any cop who so thinks should be removed from duty permanently. A local judge in Mount Juliet, TN, where the cop assaulted the man, was so dismayed by the unprovoked attack he threw the officer out of his court and told him he would dismiss any case he files. I don't blame the judge. This office is unreliable. I'll go further, this officer is a criminal.
The problems got worse for the officer. Office Crosby, the uniformed thug in question, was attempting to force the man to spit out marijuana. The man's refusal to do so meant more choking of him in order to force him to produce the evidence. The stupid officer never considered another alternative -- that the man had no marijuana and couldn't spit it out since it wasn't there. In fact, tests on the man proved that to be the case. NO marijuana was in his system at all. None that day, none in the past that they could find.
Remember a little incident in history called the Holy Inquisition. A witch sniffer would point out a witch and everything was done to force the witch to confess. There were no witches but the torture was meant to produce the evidence that there was. Here the witch sniffer was the cop who used torture, choking, to force the man to produce evidence that didn't exist. But since the evidence didn't actually exist nothing could be produced so he kept choking.
Our sane friends at StoptheDrugWar.com went and looked at a police website and read the comments by "good" cops on the site. And they are supporting the officer. One calls this "vascular restraint". A second says the "level of force has to equal the level of the crime" and is for the "safety" of "both suspect and officer." I hope I never get protected by these thugs like that. He wishes the cop "luck" on the charges he faces. A third says the judge "is off his rocker". Over and over the "good" cops try to justify the choking.
We have a cop who jumped to a conclusion that was very wrong. To force a suspect to produce evidence that didn't exist he started choking the man. And the cops are rallying behind him like he is some martyr. This is precisely why I have argued against the "myth of the good cop". Thuggish, violent cops exist. So-called good cops make it possible for them to exist. They defend them, cover up for them, and certainly turn a blind eye when these thugs are engaging in assaults on civilians. Until the "good" cops start turning on the thugs their actions only prove that there is no such thing as a good cop.
Last November we posted a video. In that video you see Utah police officer, Jon Gardner, needlessly taser a man who questioned why he was being stopped. He tried to point out that the cop actually started to pull him over BEFORE the speed limit changed. In other words. the driver was driving legally.
When the film of this ugly incident was put on Youtube an “official” investigation began. Of course, such investigations are always shams. They always turn out the same way. People are pissed so the cops announce they will investigate to calm everyone down. Then once people have forgotten that our “finest” were once again acting like mentally-disturbed bullies the police announce that the thug in uniform was “cleared” of all wrongdoing. Hell, the abuse can be blatant and filmed and they still go through the routine cover-up for a bad cop.
And that is what happened in Utah. The police officer was cleared and the victim of his attack was forced to pay a traffic fine even though he didn’t break the law.
Well, the victim in this case, Jared Massey, filed a law suit. Guess what? The state settled and admitted guilt. Once these cases get out of the hands of the police investigating their own, and go to an unbiased court, then the cops are in trouble. Why the settlement?
Apparently prosecutors in Tooele County looked at the case and admitted that Massey had not actually violated any law. He was pulled over while driving legally. So the cop was wrong from the start. Massey was correct when he tried to showed the police officer that the officer was wrong to ticket him. Because Massey disagreed with the police officer he was subjected to the painful, and potentially lethal, use of the cops favorite new toy, the taser.
A few days after prosecutors admitted that Massey had not done anything illegal the State of Utah decided to settle the case. They paid Massey attorney’s fees plus $40,000. Yet, and this incredible, they settled while still contending that the thug in uniform was in the right to do what he did. They say they can understand people were upset but said it was “a close case”.
Gardner, who ought to be in jail for assault, goes on as normal. Nothing is going to be done to him. It is right for Massey to receive compensation but I don’t see what the taxpayers of Utah ought to be required to fork out money. The people responsible for this were all in the Utah Highway Patrol. It was member of the Highway Patrol who pulled him over without cause and tasered him for daring to question that action. It was the Highway Patrol that then actively covered up the crime by claiming it was justified.
Here is an idea of how to deal with settlements made to individuals who have been victimized by the deranged individuals who now routinely inhabit America’s police departments. I suggest that all settlements be deducted directly from the salaries of all members of the police department in question. I would take 25% of the total amount out of the salary of the individual officer who committed the assault. And then I would spread the rest, proportionally, among all police officers in that department.
The taxpayers did not assault Mr. Massey, it was the Utah Highway Patrol that did that. Taxpayers are paying the price while the police basically get off free on this. If police officers saws their salaries docked to pay settlements to citizens assaulted by their fellow cops I would bet that such assaults would become very rare indeed. Cops would be far less willing to cover-up and lie for their fellow officers. They wouldn’t be as likely to turn a blind eye to the abuse that they know is routine. They would have an economic incentive to see to it that bad cops don’t misbehave.
As things currently stand their incentives are to cover-up and lie. They don’t lose anything if a settlement is reached because they acted like common criminals. The taxpayers paid the whole cost. And since cops earn their salaries from the state they are net recipients of tax money not payers. The police force won’t discipline them -- that has been proven over and over. So why rape the taxpayers for the actions of cops? If cops do the crime let them pay the penalty.
This sort of penalty system would cause them to squeal like stuck pigs -- which is precisely what they would be. They’d be stuck with the cost of their actions instead of the taxpayers. How anxious do you think they would be taser people if they knew that a loss in civil court would come out of their paychecks? I suspect they would suddenly discover that they don’t need to use violence nearly as often as they do now.
Here’s a update regarding Officer "Dude". The incident which we recounted here took place in Baltimore. Officer “Oink” is a Baltimore police officer and has been for 17-years. He is named Salvatore Rivieri. The kid he assaulted is Eric Bush, a freshman at Northeast High School. Office Oink looks well over 200 pounds. I would guess it is more like 250 pounds. His victim weighs about 125 pounds.
Eric’s mother, Peggy Miller, has said that she couldn’t believe the way that this police officer acted. “To be honest, if that officer did that to me, I would have punched him” she told WJZ news. Miller said: “I started watching the video and couldn’t continue. I flipped out.”
She wasn’t the only one. Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon said: “I saw the tape. The officer handled the situation so poorly. It is very clear this is unacceptable.” That is called an understatement. What the office did was assault.
Apparently Office Oink has a problem. He likes to intimidate people and allegedly has done it before. One woman from the Baltimore area recounted that her husband faced threats by the same officer in the same area. Her husband was riding his bike and Office Rivieri had his little security car blocking the road. To get around it the man was forced to ride on the sidewalk for the length of the vehicle. Apparently this is another offense that the Office takes very serious. She recounted that she got a frantic call from her husband fearing this officer was going to assault him. She said “Rivieri was out of control” and “this guy takes everything as an assault on his authority, no matter how trivial.”
Eric’s own words describe the story this way: “He was just like up in my face, yelling at me...then he tackled me. It was like scary because I have diabetes and my blood sugar went crazy ‘cause he scared me.” I thought the kid looked like he was in shock and he seemed genuinely bewildered as to why this large man was going ballistic. For the record the alleged worst thing the kid said was to use the term "dude" in reference to Rivieri. Rivieri lectured the boy loudly claiming "dudes" work on ranches. Apparently the officer's knowledge isn't as wide as his waist.
The city has put the officer on suspension. But so far this means a paid vacation. He doesn’t have to work but he still receives his salary. No doubt he’ll spend the day on the couch munching donuts by the dozens -- no man in his condition should never wear the uniform he had on. That alone ought to constitute assault to good taste.
The out-of-control officer has hired an attorney to defend him. The best the attorney can offer is to say “you don’t see what happened before the officer took the boy down to the ground.” Actually that is a lie. You do see the situation from the moment Office Out-of-Control started approaching the boy. You witness him put his arm around the boy’s throat and neck as if he were going to choke him or snap his neck. And you witness him throw the boy to the ground. The boy seems terrified. His alleged crime was that he didn’t hear the officer tell him to stop skateboarding. And he used the word “dude” which set the Officer into an irrational frenzy.
What we do see is damning enough. No video can show what happened before the video started. And the fact is that few people will start taping an “incident” before it is apparent that something wrong is happening. The justification used by Rivieri’s attorneys, if accepted, would basically give emotionally unstable officers carte blanch to do as they please. Even if caught on tape they can contend the tape doesn’t show what happened before the tape started.
Rivieri shouldn’t be on paid leave. He should be facing charges of assault and dereliction of duty. And please get him out of that uniform. Surely having Officer Oink in his tight shorts, running around the Waterfront area, has to put thousands of people off their lunch. He must really discourage tourists from eating at the local restaurants -- though I suspect he more than makes up for the meals they don’t buy by himself.
DiggIt!
Reddit
Del.icio.us
Slashdot It!
|
