Has anyone been following this case? College football player killed by NYC cops

[malkusm]

This has been ongoing for a while. Seems right up Anti Federalist's alley :(

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5741263


VALHALLA, N.Y. -- A college football player was driving drunk when he was shot to death by police outside a bar after his homecoming game, a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation told The Associated Press on Friday.

Danroy "D.J." Henry's blood-alcohol level was measured during his autopsy at 0.13, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the autopsy report hadn't been released.

The legal limit for driving in New York is 0.08.

Henry, a Pace University student from Easton, Mass., was shot in his car early Sunday after police responded to a disturbance outside a bar in suburban Thornwood, N.Y. Police said he sped away and hit two officers after a policeman knocked on his car window. His family says witnesses contradict that account.

Henry's father, Danroy Henry Sr., said outside his Massachusetts home Friday that the release of the autopsy finding seemed aimed at swaying public opinion.

"If it's a part of the truth, so be it," he said. "But at the end of the day, the central question to us is, does that justify killing our son? ... We still fundamentally believe it isn't."

Michael Sussman, a lawyer for Henry's family, said Henry had been at the bar for about an hour and a half but hadn't been drinking because he was a designated driver. Two days earlier, Sussman had said Henry hadn't been inside Finnegan's Grill.

Sussman said police were releasing the information "to change the conversation away from what police did."

"Probably several million college students have levels of 0.13 on Saturday night and early Sunday morning," Sussman said. "It had nothing to do with police approaching him."

Mount Pleasant police Chief Louis Alagno, who is investigating the shooting, said he had not seen the autopsy results.

Earlier Friday, Alagno held a news conference to counter claims that Henry was left to die without swift medical help. He presented a timeline indicating that the student received treatment from officers within three to five minutes of the first report of a shooting.

Lawyers for some witnesses have alleged that Henry was neglected for up to 15 minutes after he was shot.

Later Friday, about 70 football players and supporters attended a press conference in Tarrytown, N.Y., where a teammate, Daniel Parker, of Lauderhill, Fla., briefly recounted the chaos of that night.

Parker has claimed that police prevented him from helping Henry after the shooting and beat him when he persisted. He is one of three teammates charged with obstruction. A fourth is accused of breaking a store window.

"Can I help him? I know CPR," Parker recalled telling police. "I said, 'He's dying. Can I help him? Can I help him?' And I was cut off."

Parker's attorney, Bonita Zelman, prevented him from answering reporters' questions.

Zelman and other speakers called for the state attorney general or the federal government to take over the investigation. Although none have alleged bias in the shooting or aftermath, several said police needed better training in dealing with "communities of color."

The officers who fired at Henry's car are white. Henry's family is biracial, his attorney said. Henry's parents said Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America" that they don't want to turn their son's death into a racial issue.

Alagno said investigators are looking for a woman who gave Henry chest compressions before officers took over. Zelman said she knows who the woman is and will try to talk to her.

Alagno said the first report of a disturbance in the bar was at 1:19 a.m. Sunday, and the first report of a shooting was at 1:25 a.m. Between 1:28 and 1:30 a.m., officers noted Henry's "grave condition," retrieved oxygen and a defibrillator, and took over CPR from the woman. By 1:35 a.m., Henry was loaded on a stretcher and wheeled to an ambulance, he said.

Zelman said, "I don't buy it." She called Alagno's account a cover-up.

Alagno said Henry was handcuffed after the shooting but said he does not know how long the cuffs were on. He had said previously that Henry was uncuffed once officers saw the severity of his injury.

A preliminary autopsy confirmed "death by gunshot," Alagno said. He did not say which officer's bullet caused the death or how many times Henry was hit. He said the investigation will take months.

A union representing one of the officers who fired on the car, Pleasantville Officer Aaron Hess, said Hess "acted in accordance with his training and as required under the circumstances."

The other officer who fired at the car has been identified as Mount Pleasant Officer Ronald Beckley.

[malkusm]

More: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5703492


THORNWOOD, N.Y. -- Investigators are trying to unravel conflicting accounts of how a Pace University football player driving away from the scene of a fight ended up dead hours after the team's homecoming game, struck in a burst of police gunfire that pierced his windshield.

Authorities say Danroy "D.J." Henry, 20, was parked in a fire lane outside a suburban New York bar but sped away from officers who rapped on his car window, hitting one who clung to the hood as the sedan barreled toward a colleague.

But the father of a passenger in the car says the driver took off because he thought police wanted him to move -- and he denied that an officer was struck.

The New York State Police, Westchester County crime scene experts and the office of Westchester County District Attorney Janet DiFiore are investigating the events involving three local police officers early Sunday. Henry had just played in Pace's game against Stonehill College of Easton, Mass., the junior defensive back's hometown.

His family and friends are skeptical of the account of events police gave.

Brandon Cox, a passenger in Henry's car who was grazed by a bullet, said they "won't rest until we get justice for D.J."

"In my heart, what went on that night ... it didn't need to come to that," Cox, who played football for Stonehill, said at a news conference outside his family's home in Easton. "Whether we were trying to drive away or not ... there was no need for any of that to happen. I do feel that we were victimized in that my friend's life was taken for no reason."

Cox's father, Thomas Parks, said Henry thought a police officer who knocked on the window of the car wanted them to move, so he started driving. He said Henry and Cox then saw an officer climb onto the hood and fire into the car.

The two were not involved in the fight that drew police to the scene, Parks said. Mount Pleasant Police Chief Louis Alagno said he would not comment on Parks' account.

DiFiore, speaking Tuesday at an unrelated news conference in Yonkers, expressed confidence that her investigation will unearth exactly what happened. She said everyone with information will be interviewed. DiFiore said she expected to speak Tuesday with Henry's parents.

A disturbance at Finnegan's Grill spilled from the strip mall in the Westchester County hamlet of Thornwood into the parking lot, and police from Pleasantville and Mount Pleasant were called.

Henry's Nissan Altima was parked in a fire lane as officers arrived. When an officer knocked on his window, Henry stepped on the gas, Alagno said.

"For no reason, the vehicle sped away," Alagno said at a news conference. "I can't describe to you why the driver did what he did."

Pleasantville Officer Aaron Hess tried to stop the car, was struck and "ended up on the hood," Alagno said. Hess drew his pistol and fired into the vehicle, the chief said.

Mount Pleasant Officer Ronald Beckley also fired at the car as it neared him in the fire lane, Alagno said. Another Mount Pleasant officer, Carl Castagna, was also struck; none of the three officers was seriously injured. A back-seat passenger in Henry's car was unhurt, Alagno said.

The Nissan, still in the fire lane, crashed into a patrol car and stopped. Officers handcuffed Henry, but "on seeing his condition they uncuffed him" and treated him, including with a defibrillator, Alagno said.

A student's cell phone video recording of the aftermath appears to show people performing chest compression on a person amid flashing police lights and screaming students clutching themselves against the night chill.

One passenger suffered a graze wound, and it wasn't clear whose bullet killed Henry. Police are gathering "all available video" from nearby stores, Alagno said.

A candlelight vigil was held Sunday evening at Pace's Pleasantville campus, which Henry attended.

"A lot of witnesses" disagree with the preliminary police account, his father, Danroy Henry Sr., told the Brockton Enterprise of Massachusetts on Sunday, "so we need to get to the bottom of it."

Cox, who wouldn't elaborate on the events of early Sunday, citing his lawyer's advice, said he was "heartbroken."

"We spent all our summers together," he said. "We worked out together. We got ready for football together. We laughed ... we rejoiced together.

[AxisMundi]

This "community of color" bull crap has got to stop if the "community of color" has any intention of actually eliminating racism and discrimination.

The kid assaulted the cops with a deadly weapon, his car. Police are justified in shooting.

As unfortunate as this incident is, it was the kid's choice in drinking and getting behind the wheel, and his choice in stomping on the accelorator. He is not innocent for being part of the "community of color".

And no, I am no racist. I am just sick and tired of the victim mentality and social segrigation supposed "civil rights activists" burden minorities with to further their own political and material wealth.

[malkusm]

Hmm, I understand what you're saying, but I think that's a very, very small part of this story that you're blowing way out of proportion.

Cops say that the driver accelerated rapidly and that a cop in front of the car was rolled up onto the hood by the impact. Yet, the officer wasn't hurt. He then decided that the proper action to take was to fire two shots through the windshield at the driver, despite the fact that there was an officer standing next to the vehicle who had knocked on the window (prompting the car to move), and a third officer within distance to hear the gunshots and do his own bit of over-reaction by firing a third shot.

Every witness that was not a cop has claimed that the young man was neglected medical care for 15+ minutes after the shooting.

ETA: The "drunk driving" ploy was also something that was added in after the fact in an attempt to cover or somehow justify the actions of the officer. Officers reported no indication of alcohol being involved the night of the shooting.

[malkusm]

The police departments have also refused the family access to the recordings of the 911 calls: http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/ncf/news/story?id=5796025

[One Last Battle!]

The police are apparently making excuses again. A shame that there are people who will defend the police regardless of what they do.

[jrskblx125]

Yah the family is from mass. Its pretty fucked.

[MelissaCato]

Never mind.

[thehighwaymanq]

My brother goes to the school. All the students call bullshit on the entire thing. Really a terrible thing :(

[AxisMundi]

Hmm, I understand what you're saying, but I think that's a very, very small part of this story that you're blowing way out of proportion.

Cops say that the driver accelerated rapidly and that a cop in front of the car was rolled up onto the hood by the impact. Yet, the officer wasn't hurt. He then decided that the proper action to take was to fire two shots through the windshield at the driver, despite the fact that there was an officer standing next to the vehicle who had knocked on the window (prompting the car to move), and a third officer within distance to hear the gunshots and do his own bit of over-reaction by firing a third shot.

Every witness that was not a cop has claimed that the young man was neglected medical care for 15+ minutes after the shooting.

ETA: The "drunk driving" ploy was also something that was added in after the fact in an attempt to cover or somehow justify the actions of the officer. Officers reported no indication of alcohol being involved the night of the shooting.

Firsrtly, I wasn't there, and neither were you. We have either the "official" story, or the stories of "witnesses" that conflict each other.

Secondly, I will stand by our Law Enforcment Community until and unless a clear example of malfeance is proven. Just as those accused of criminality are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law in this country, the same applies to our men and women in uniform.

[Anti Federalist]

Secondly, I will stand by our Law Enforcment Community until and unless a clear example of malfeance is proven. Just as those accused of criminality are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law in this country, the same applies to our men and women in uniform.

And that, right there, is why we have the problem that we do.

Too many people have that mindset, and until that changes, people will continue to be gunned down, tased, beat and treated like enemy combatants.

And it will only get worse.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Almost all police reports written today by involved officiers are first submitted to the government lawyers to review. Once they have "Critiqued" the report(s), the involve officiers rewrite their reports and then they are "Officially" submitted.

Pretty much SOP for all US City Law Enforcement agencies.

The game is rigged and it's not in the people's favor. Judge just brought this up this morning about the traffic incident in Denver with an eyewitness.

[TonySutton]

I find it hard to believe an officer could pull his weapon and fire two shots while laying on the hood of a car that hit while speeding away. I look forward to hearing more eye witness accounts.

[Anti Federalist]

This has been ongoing for a while. Seems right up Anti Federalist's alley :(

Thanks for posting Malk, I think it was posted once, when it first happened, IIRC.

I reviewed the story and was going to comment further but I try, in my posting of these stories, to apply a little "self editorial" discretion.

By that I mean, I look for those stories that are just so over the top, so very clearly wrong, that nobody, but nobody, can question the actions of the cops and that no thinking person could come away from reading the story and not think that the cops acted like a bunch or murdering goons.

And there are so many of them, my supply of "WTF?" has just about run out.

But when you come across a story like this one, that leaves just the slightest amount of wiggle room as to who the first aggressive party was, then the cop lovers and soldier sniffers will be all over it in a second, ready to stand by "those brave boys in blue" and defend whatever it was they did, no matter how shady.

[AxisMundi]

And that, right there, is why we have the problem that we do.

Too many people have that mindset, and until that changes, people will continue to be gunned down, tased, beat and treated like enemy combatants.

And it will only get worse.

No, we have troubles firstly due to voter apathy, and secondly due to hysterical reactions such as the one in the OP, a reaction first without all the facts, and second with prejudging the officers involved.

Are there "bad" cops out there?

Certainly. But to think the entire LEO establishment is 'evil" does the greatest disservice to the "good cops", men and women who have devoted their lives to Protect and Serve their fellow citizens, cops who never make the news (or youtube) because the media establishment thrives on conflict, not feel-good stories of everyday heroes.

[AxisMundi]

Thanks for posting Malk, I think it was posted once, when it first happened, IIRC.

I reviewed the story and was going to comment further but I try, in my posting of these stories, to apply a little "self editorial" discretion.

By that I mean, I look for those stories that are just so over the top, so very clearly wrong, that nobody, but nobody, can question the actions of the cops and that no thinking person could come away from reading the story and not think that the cops acted like a bunch or murdering goons.

And there are so many of them, my supply of "WTF?" has just about run out.

But when you come across a story like this one, that leaves just the slightest amount of wiggle room as to who the first aggressive party was, then the cop lovers and soldier sniffers will be all over it in a second, ready to stand by "those brave boys in blue" and defend whatever it was they did, no matter how shady.

And there are those too quick to villify those "brave boys in blue" because they represent authority and/or the establishment.

[Anti Federalist]

No, we have troubles firstly due to voter apathy, and secondly due to hysterical reactions such as the one in the OP, a reaction first without all the facts, and second with prejudging the officers involved.

Are there "bad" cops out there?

Certainly. But to think the entire LEO establishment is 'evil" does the greatest disservice to the "good cops", men and women who have devoted their lives to Protect and Serve their fellow citizens, cops who never make the news (or youtube) because the media establishment thrives on conflict, not feel-good stories of everyday heroes.

There are no "good cops", if there were, there would be no "bad cops".

What is happening across the country is not the result of bad apples but, once again, the product of militarized training, done mostly at the behest of the fedgov, that is training the cops that we the people are the enemy, that every encounter with a citizen is to be treated as an encounter with a "hostile".

And if you even twitch wrong or don't "comply" immediately, you stand a good chance of being blown away.

And by what measure are they "heroes"?

Because the job is so dangerous?

I have spent my entire life working jobs that are, statistically, much more dangerous than being a cop.

Does that make me a "superhero"?

[pcosmar]

Certainly. But to think the entire LEO establishment is 'evil" does the greatest disservice to the

WRONG.
LEO Establishment, since it's very establishment is anti-liberty and contrary to the intent of the Founders.
There was never intended to be a standing Army of Law enforcement in this land.

There is supposed to be an elected Sheriff and the militia. (the whole people, armed)

It began long ago when people chose to neglect their responsibility for self defense and hired thugs to "protect" them.
Then they heaped on a multitude of unnecessary laws to support the hired thugs and give reason for their existence.
Lawyers and LE have been an unholy pox on this land ever since.

:(

[malkusm]

No, we have troubles firstly due to voter apathy, and secondly due to hysterical reactions such as the one in the OP, a reaction first without all the facts, and second with prejudging the officers involved.

Please show me where in the OP there was a "hysterical reaction ... without all the facts."

For your convenience, I've quoted the OP below.



This has been ongoing for a while. Seems right up Anti Federalist's alley :(

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5741263

[osan]

Firsrtly, I wasn't there, and neither were you. We have either the "official" story, or the stories of "witnesses" that conflict each other.

Secondly, I will stand by our Law Enforcment Community until and unless a clear example of malfeance is proven. Just as those accused of criminality are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law in this country, the same applies to our men and women in uniform.

If your not having been there is so significant, why are you standing by anyone?

I say if the cops are dirty, hunt them, find them, kill them; for they are cold blooded murderers and justice should be served, even if it must happen in a cold, dark alley with them begging for their lives. I have no pity nor mercy for such vermin. If they murder us with impunity, we must return the honor.

[BlackTerrel]

I find it hard to believe an officer could pull his weapon and fire two shots while laying on the hood of a car that hit while speeding away. I look forward to hearing more eye witness accounts.

I was thinking the same thing. The official version sounds hard to believe.

[Anti Federalist]

WRONG.
LEO Establishment, since it's very establishment is anti-liberty and contrary to the intent of the Founders.
There was never intended to be a standing Army of Law enforcement in this land.

There is supposed to be an elected Sheriff and the militia. (the whole people, armed)

It began long ago when people chose to neglect their responsibility for self defense and hired thugs to "protect" them.
Then they heaped on a multitude of unnecessary laws to support the hired thugs and give reason for their existence.
Lawyers and LE have been an unholy pox on this land ever since.
:(

That, +a million

[osan]

WRONG.
LEO Establishment, since it's very establishment is anti-liberty and contrary to the intent of the Founders.
There was never intended to be a standing Army of Law enforcement in this land.

There is supposed to be an elected Sheriff and the militia. (the whole people, armed)

It began long ago when people chose to neglect their responsibility for self defense and hired thugs to "protect" them.
Then they heaped on a multitude of unnecessary laws to support the hired thugs and give reason for their existence.
Lawyers and LE have been an unholy pox on this land ever since.

:(

Well thank you very much. Someone had to say it.

Kudos.


PS: fuck the cops. :)

[AxisMundi]

There are no "good cops", if there were, there would be no "bad cops".

What is happening across the country is not the result of bad apples but, once again, the product of militarized training, done mostly at the behest of the fedgov, that is training the cops that we the people are the enemy, that every encounter with a citizen is to be treated as an encounter with a "hostile".

And if you even twitch wrong or don't "comply" immediately, you stand a good chance of being blown away.

And by what measure are they "heroes"?

Because the job is so dangerous?

I have spent my entire life working jobs that are, statistically, much more dangerous than being a cop.

Does that make me a "superhero"?

Your reply drips with willful pessimism.

[AxisMundi]

Please show me where in the OP there was a "hysterical reaction ... without all the facts."

For your convenience, I've quoted the OP below.

Hysterical reaction - teh immediate villification of the police involved when all the facts are not present, and those that are are ignored and immediatly dismissed, and the witness accounts vary widely, and in some cases, contradict each other.

[pcosmar]

Your reply drips with willful pessimism.

willful pessimism?

More like an recognition of reality and a rejection of propaganda.

[AxisMundi]

If your not having been there is so significant, why are you standing by anyone?

Because "Innocent until proven guilty" has become a thing of the past in our American mentality, thanks to the news media and their habit of assuming guilt to sell papers.


I say if the cops are dirty, hunt them, find them, kill them; for they are cold blooded murderers and justice should be served, even if it must happen in a cold, dark alley with them begging for their lives. I have no pity nor mercy for such vermin. If they murder us with impunity, we must return the honor.

Found guilty in a court of law, sentanced to prison, and put in the general population will suffice nicely for a Nation that supposedly prides herself in Law and Justice.

[pcosmar]

Because "Innocent until proven guilty" has become a thing of the past in our American mentality, thanks to the news media and their habit of assuming guilt to sell papers.



Found guilty in a court of law, sentanced to prison, and put in the general population will suffice nicely for a Nation that supposedly prides herself in Law and Justice.
What false reality are you living in.
Police as a rule and with few exceptions are not prosecuted by the same system that they are an integral part of.

Police are investigated by police, and their crimes are ignored and covered up, or otherwise "Justified".

On the odd occasion that they are actually convicted, they are given lighter sentences than anyone of the general population would receive, And when they are imprisoned they are protected.

There is a very clear double standard.
:(

[AxisMundi]

willful pessimism?

More like an recognition of reality and a rejection of propaganda.

There are nearly a million cops in the US today. (estimated, there were just over 800.000 as of 2006)

And you are claiming that they are all "evil storm troopers in blue".

[pcosmar]

There are nearly a million cops in the US today. (estimated, there were just over 800.000 as of 2006)

:eek:
Why?

:confused:

:mad:
That means there are about a million too many. They should not exist. Certainly not in those numbers.

You really don't "get it"
Do You?

read the sig line

[AxisMundi]

WRONG.
LEO Establishment, since it's very establishment is anti-liberty and contrary to the intent of the Founders.
There was never intended to be a standing Army of Law enforcement in this land.

There is supposed to be an elected Sheriff and the militia. (the whole people, armed)

It began long ago when people chose to neglect their responsibility for self defense and hired thugs to "protect" them.
Then they heaped on a multitude of unnecessary laws to support the hired thugs and give reason for their existence.
Lawyers and LE have been an unholy pox on this land ever since.

:(

We have always been a Nation of Laws.

How do you, exactly, think those laws are to be enforced?

Also, please feel free to show where 1. Sheriffs (who have not always been an elected official) are mandated in the Constitution, and 2. law enforcment is in any way, shape, or form the province of a militia.

And might I suggest you do some research on the subject? Police, of one form or another, have been present since our Colonial era.

[AxisMundi]

What false reality are you living in.
Police as a rule and with few exceptions are not prosecuted by the same system that they are an integral part of.

Police are investigated by police, and their crimes are ignored and covered up, or otherwise "Justified".

On the odd occasion that they are actually convicted, they are given lighter sentences than anyone of the general population would receive, And when they are imprisoned they are protected.

There is a very clear double standard.
:(

Get back to me when you find yourself somewhere near reality.

LEO's are tried in the same court system as the rest of us.

[Anti Federalist]

There are nearly a million cops in the US today. (estimated, there were just over 800.000 as of 2006)

And you are claiming that they are all "evil storm troopers in blue".

Yes.

While I can't speak for Pete, although I'm very sure he would agree, that is precisely what I'm saying.

They are being trained, more and more, to act as an army of occupation and not "peace officers".

Also, I ask again, what makes them heroes?

[pcosmar]

Get back to me when you find yourself somewhere near reality.

LEO's are tried in the same court system as the rest of us.

It is obvious that you have no concept of either Liberty or the present day realities.

Your statement would be funny if it were not so pathetically sad..
:(

[AxisMundi]

Yes....

Then there is no possibility of a reasonable, rational discussion with you.

[AxisMundi]

It is obvious that you have no concept of either Liberty or the present day realities.

Your statement would be funny if it were not so pathetically sad..
:(

The fact that I have yet to have a reasonable debate with you, sicne you only have rather laughable comments and insults to offer, is quite sad.

Added in Edit:

BTW, still waiting for a reply to my post at the top of this page that you skipped over.

[pcosmar]

BTW, still waiting for a reply to my post at the top of this page that you skipped over.

Didn't skip over it. I was ignoring it.
Most people here know of Sheriff Mack.
http://www.sheriffmack.com/

But then most have some idea of the Founders writings and of Liberty.


The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power.


Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.


“A standing army is one of the greatest mischief that can possibly happen”


"the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone,"
James Madison

[invisible]

Get back to me when you find yourself somewhere near reality.

LEO's are tried in the same court system as the rest of us.

Really? They are? If you think so, then it's obvious you've never tried to actually have a cop taken to court. Just wait until the police assault YOU, steal YOUR property, or falsely arrest YOU! Perhaps then you'll find out what the reality really is.

[Kylie]

I think Axis is the same guy I argued this with the other night on another site.

Same argument. Same end result.

I just agreed to disagree and told him that when he did finally realize that I'm right, I'll be more than happy to forgive him his error. He was not so nice in his reply.

[AxisMundi]

Didn't skip over it. I was ignoring it.
Most people here know of Sheriff Mack.
http://www.sheriffmack.com/

But then most have some idea of the Founders writings and of Liberty.

I'll repost so you can answer the questions...

How do you, exactly, think those laws are to be enforced?

Also, please feel free to show where 1. Sheriffs (who have not always been an elected official) are mandated in the Constitution, and 2. law enforcment is in any way, shape, or form the province of a militia.

Considering that you refuse to answer these simply questions, I seriously doubt you have any foundation in questioning my knowledge of our Founders and liberty itself.

[AxisMundi]

Really? They are? If you think so, then it's obvious you've never tried to actually have a cop taken to court. Just wait until the police assault YOU, steal YOUR property, or falsely arrest YOU! Perhaps then you'll find out what the reality really is.

Have YOU ever tried to ahve a cop taken to court?

A simple google results in a plethora of examples of cops being taken to court.

[AxisMundi]

I think Axis is the same guy I argued this with the other night on another site.

Same argument. Same end result.

I just agreed to disagree and told him that when he did finally realize that I'm right, I'll be more than happy to forgive him his error. He was not so nice in his reply.

I do not hide behind multiple user names.

I use the same no matter what forum I am posting on.

[invisible]

Have YOU ever tried to ahve a cop taken to court?

A simple google results in a plethora of examples of cops being taken to court.


Yes. More than once. Some cop still has my property, and I still haven't been reinbursed for my medical bills from being beaten. Sure, a google search might show you the tiny fraction of cops that are actually held somewhat accountable - so what? As I said, you'll wake up to reality once it happens to YOU.

[fisharmor]

How do you, exactly, think those laws are to be enforced?

I'll feed the troll for a while...

First of all, I would contend that upwards of 90% of the "laws" being enforced are arbitrary, unfounded, protectionist, unnecessary, tyrannical, or otherwise not deserving of existence in a free society.

Second of all, I would contend that of the remaining 10% of the "laws" being enforced, most could be handled by the common law courts that the US Constitution assumes will exist, and yet, strangely, do not.

So your whole "enforcing the law" thing is, to use the colloquialism, fuckin' broken to begin with, so it's a meaningless effort for you to try to argue that we need people to enforce something that isn't supposed to exist in its current form.

Third of all, if you think police are tried in the same court system we are, I mock you. You haven't been paying attention. These police officers haven't murdered a college student. They have made an official request for paid time off from their jobs. That is the sum and total of what happens in cases when the police kill a citizen.

Fourth, if you think that these police are deserving of the exact same treatment as us mere mundanes, then I take you to task for that. They are from New York. Therefore, in order to qualify as having the same treatment, they must be disarmed, those who dare to keep arms must be registered with the state for future confiscation of their arms, and those with the temerity to carry those arms must be incarcerated for a long, long time, regardless of whether they ever use them, and regardless of whether they use them justifiably.

[AxisMundi]

Yes. More than once. Some cop still has my property, and I still haven't been reinbursed for my medical bills from being beaten. Sure, a google search might show you the tiny fraction of cops that are actually held somewhat accountable - so what? As I said, you'll wake up to reality once it happens to YOU.

A drunk cop totalled my truck several years ago.

In court, I was rewarded with replacement costs and medical bills.

All your personal example shows is that you had a poor lawyer.

[Anti Federalist]

A drunk cop totalled my truck several years ago.

In court, I was rewarded with replacement costs and medical bills.

All your personal example shows is that you had a poor lawyer.

And the same thing happened to a buddy of mine in New Jersey.

But he was not able to sue, there is, apparently, a law on the books in NJ that states you can't sue cops for damages they cause while on duty, even if shit faced.

But this is a silly premise you are staking out here.

Obviously cops get more preferential treatment at the hands of the just-us system than your average mundane would.

You can't seriously be suggesting otherwise, can you?

[AxisMundi]

I'll feed the troll for a while...

First of all, I would contend that upwards of 90% of the "laws" being enforced are arbitrary, unfounded, protectionist, unnecessary, tyrannical, or otherwise not deserving of existence in a free society.

Second of all, I would contend that of the remaining 10% of the "laws" being enforced, most could be handled by the common law courts that the US Constitution assumes will exist, and yet, strangely, do not.

So your whole "enforcing the law" thing is, to use the colloquialism, fuckin' broken to begin with, so it's a meaningless effort for you to try to argue that we need people to enforce something that isn't supposed to exist in its current form.

Third of all, if you think police are tried in the same court system we are, I mock you. You haven't been paying attention. These police officers haven't murdered a college student. They have made an official request for paid time off from their jobs. That is the sum and total of what happens in cases when the police kill a citizen.

Fourth, if you think that these police are deserving of the exact same treatment as us mere mundanes, then I take you to task for that. They are from New York. Therefore, in order to qualify as having the same treatment, they must be disarmed, those who dare to keep arms must be registered with the state for future confiscation of their arms, and those with the temerity to carry those arms must be incarcerated for a long, long time, regardless of whether they ever use them, and regardless of whether they use them justifiably.

1. Quite agreed. Many laws are indeed as you suggest. However, who will arrest and bring to trail a law breaker, even if all laws that were arbitrary, unfounded, protectionist, unnecessary, tyrannical, or otherwise not deserving of existence in a free society were eliminated? Lynch mobs?

2. The Constitution does not assume common law courts, it secifically creates the Judicial Branch of the Government.

3. Removal from active service is, and always has been, SOP in such cases as this. If the officers are indeed found to have acted appropiatly, it would be certainly unfair, even criminal, to require they reliquish their pay for the period of investigation.

If found guilty, I already noted prison, and general population, for the officers in question.

[AxisMundi]

And the same thing happened to a buddy of mine in New Jersey.

But he was not able to sue, there is, apparently, a law on the books in NJ that states you can't sue cops for damages they cause while on duty, even if shit faced.

But this is a silly premise you are staking out here.

Obviously cops get more preferential treatment at the hands of the just-us system than your average mundane would.

You can't seriously be suggesting otherwise, can you?

Firstly, if NJ has stupid laws on the books, get them changed.

Secondly, if a cop shoots his lover's wife, does he get "preferential treatment"?

[payme_rick]

Secondly, if a cop shoots his lover's wife, does he get "preferential treatment"?

In some cases yes... esspecially if the cop's buddies are conducting the investigations, handling evidence etc...

[AxisMundi]

In some cases yes... esspecially if the cop's buddies are conducting the investigations, handling evidence etc...

And if evidence tampering can be proven in a court of law, what happens then?

[Anti Federalist]

Firstly, if NJ has stupid laws on the books, get them changed.

Secondly, if a cop shoots his lover's wife, does he get "preferential treatment"?

Hard to change a law like that, in a state full of cop worshipers.

And yes, all the time, that sort of thing happens.

There was a case in Ohio recently IIRC where the cop beat his wife, multiple times, for having an affair, they got divorced, the cop went on to shoot the new boyfriend and his cop buddies and the prosecutor covered up for him.

[Anti Federalist]

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/131879_cops23.html

Cops who abuse their wives rarely pay the price

By RUTH TEICHROEB AND JULIE DAVIDOW
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS

Their wedding cake shimmered with pearls, symbolizing marital bliss. Armfuls of roses, in shades of lavender and cream, scented the hall.

During the June 2000 ceremony, Phil Rees vowed to "love and cherish" his bride.

Less than two months later, the Seattle police officer found himself under investigation for domestic violence.

That night at their Burien home, Jenifer Rees watched in disbelief as King County sheriff's deputies handed her intoxicated husband back his gun and let him drive away -- so he wouldn't miss work in the morning



Oh yeah, any old Mundane would get the same courtesy.

Good god Axis, get your nose out of the cop's ass, I could shut the board's servers down with stories like that.

[Anti Federalist]

The Rogue Cop and the Corrupt State Win Again

Posted by Christopher Manion on November 17, 2010 09:11 AM

Surprise!

“In April 2008, off-duty Officer Jason Cokinos struck 12-year-old Luis Jovel Jr. with his police cruiser as the boy crossed the street in front of his home on Stringtown Road. In a follow-up report, police determined that Cokinos was driving 56 miles per hour in a 30 mph zone and concluded that the boy would not have been hit if the officer were traveling at the speed limit.

The family originally sought millions of dollars from the county and Cokinos, but was entitled to just $200,000 per case, under state law limiting liability for local governments.

Luis, now a quadriplegic, has permanent brain injury and difficulty speaking. The freshman at Clarksburg High School requires around-the-clock medical care for tasks as small as turning or getting ready in the morning. Norma said her husband, Luis Jovel Sr., works as a manager at McDonald’s and doesn’t earn nearly enough money to cover their son’s expenses.”

The moral law and the common law and “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” be damned, “Officer” Jason Cokinos is still in uniform doing “community action” work. There is no word as to whether Cokinos ever apologized or even expressed regret that “mistakes were made.” Since there will be no trial, we may never know. [His lawyer once said Cokinos "felt very sorry for what happened." I'm sure he does - after all, he got a speeding ticket.]

In light of this officially-sanctioned travesty, I wonder if the “community” might consider taking some human action of its own?

[Krugerrand]

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/131879_cops23.html

Cops who abuse their wives rarely pay the price
....

In SW Pennsylvania, they get promoted.

[Mach]

Firsrtly, I wasn't there, and neither were you. We have either the "official" story, or the stories of "witnesses" that conflict each other.

Secondly, I will stand by our Law Enforcment Community until and unless a clear example of malfeance is proven. Just as those accused of criminality are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law in this country, the same applies to our men and women in uniform.
.....................................http://plus613.net/forum/mods/smileys/images/handjob.gif

[invisible]

A drunk cop totalled my truck several years ago.

In court, I was rewarded with replacement costs and medical bills.

All your personal example shows is that you had a poor lawyer.

It's obviously quite different if you have the multimillion dollar resources and contractural obligation of an insurance company on your side. I called up every lawyer in the phone book, and was told repeatedly that they would not take a case against the government. Several told me that my damages and medical expenses didn't make the case worth enough money to them. Several others told me that they wouldn't take the case because I'm not black. The ACLU and Institute for Justice weren't interested because it "didn't set precedent" or advance their agenda in some way. Meanwhile, the statute of limitations expires. As I said, the problem is one of getting them into the courtroom in the first place, the lawyers know how badly the system is rigged. And as I also said before, just wait until this happens to YOU.

[fisharmor]

1. Quite agreed. Many laws are indeed as you suggest. However, who will arrest and bring to trail a law breaker, even if all laws that were arbitrary, unfounded, protectionist, unnecessary, tyrannical, or otherwise not deserving of existence in a free society were eliminated? Lynch mobs?

A lynch mob, by definition, does not dispense justice. It cannot, therefore, be the answer to your question.
My immediate answer to this would be that perhaps the nonexistent but constitutionally mandated well-regulated militia would be called in order to deal with serious law breakers:
which militia will never exist as long as the police state has any say in the matter at all - let alone what they have today, which is the only and the final say.


2. The Constitution does not assume common law courts, it secifically creates the Judicial Branch of the Government.
7th Amendment. Trials at common law shall be juried. However, SCOTUS has never incorporated the 7th Amendment to the 14th. Due to that particularly messed up legal doctrine, this means that common law courts can only be juried on the federal level. SCOTUS has also ruled, in 1938 in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, that there is no federal common law.
So we're stuck with a meaningless amendment - and it's the one that assumes that there will be common law courts.
Louisiana is an example which has no common law system at all, and some other states have hybrids. Others have common law systems which are abused (this is AFAIK what tort reform is meant to not-really-address).


3. Removal from active service is, and always has been, SOP in such cases as this. If the officers are indeed found to have acted appropiatly, it would be certainly unfair, even criminal, to require they reliquish their pay for the period of investigation.

If found guilty, I already noted prison, and general population, for the officers in question.

I will admit that in a minority of cases this is possible.
Please address my fourth point: that police are quite obviously treated separately from us in that they are issued arms to which we have either no access or restricted access.

[AxisMundi]

Hard to change a law like that, in a state full of cop worshipers.

You're speaking to a NYS resident who knows full well how hard laws are to change.

We were called the Empire State because of our natural resources. Now we are called the Empire State simply because our state troopers should be dressed in white, thanks to Albany.

But just because something is difficult doesn't mean the attempts should not be made.


And yes, all the time, that sort of thing happens.

There was a case in Ohio recently IIRC where the cop beat his wife, multiple times, for having an affair, they got divorced, the cop went on to shoot the new boyfriend and his cop buddies and the prosecutor covered up for him.

Link please.

[fisharmor]

You're speaking to a NYS resident who knows full well how hard laws are to change.

We were called the Empire State because of our natural resources. Now we are called the Empire State simply because our state troopers should be dressed in white, thanks to Albany.

But just because something is difficult doesn't mean the attempts should not be made.

Two points.

First, if it's so hard to change the law, why stop where you did when deciding what to fight for? If you want to change the law, why settle for changing it back to being only 80% totalitarian, when you could be fighting for 0% totalitarian?

Second, if you think you should be advocating the 80% position because the 0% position is extremist and hopeless... well, it starts with YOU. Ultimately, the reason why the 0% totalitarianism position is unachievable is because of you.

If every single person who settles for 80% realized that they could have 0%, that would be more than enough to get us there.
But it's not going to happen as long as you don't join us.
It's exactly what I said in 2007 when people said RP was unelectable. Sure, he was unelectable - but only because everybody was too busy calling him unelectable and not actually supporting him.
Join us on the extremist end. The more of you we get, the more likely change actually is.

[Anti Federalist]

Link please.

Looking for it, in the meantime, plenty more are showing up.

Charges Dropped Against Woman Framed by Cops
Police seen plotting to blame car accident on woman they hit

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Cops-Set-Up-Woman-After-Crash.html

Alexandra Torrensvilas was the target of cops who pinned a DUI on her for an accident they caused. Now she has been cleared of charges after the Broward State Attorney's Office officially dropped the four DUI citations on Wednesday.

But the saga is far from over as now prosecutors turn their attention to the four Hollywood police officers who made up an intricate story to cover for a February traffic accident involving a cop car. The scheme was caught on one of the officers dashboard cameras.

The disturbing video shows Alexandra Torrensvilas, 23, handcuffed in the back of the squad car as the officers get their stories straight on what they are going to say happened.

Officer Joel Francisco, 36, an 11-year veteran, crashed into the back of Torrensvilas' vehicle at a light on February 17 at midnight. The cop radioed to other officers who converged on the scene and hatched a way to bail Francisco out.

Officer Dewey Pressley, 42, arrives and questions Torrensvilas, who tells him that she has been drinking. The 21-year veteran officer seizes the opportunity and arrests her for DUI. But the plot thickens from there.

The cops begin to brainstorm believable excuses for the accident.

"As far as I'm concerned. I'm going to put words in his mouth. She went to accelerate and a cat jumped out of the window at which point he thought it could have been a pedestrian, which distracted him," Pressley tells Sgt. Andrew Diaz, another veteran of the force. "I mean what's the chances of hitting a f---in drunk when a cat jumps out of the window?"

Still, the cops run with the half-baked idea and rush to get Torrensvilas to do a Breathalyzer test so they can officially say she was drunk.

"I nailed her on the video. I already hung her on video. She said she has been doing a beer party," Pressley says. "She's gonna blow."

Then, another cop debates with Pressley on who is going to write up the fabricated report to clear their police comrade.

"I know how I'm going to word this with the cat so we can get him off the hook. I'll write the narrative," Pressley says. "We're going to bend this a little bit."

Civilian Community Service Officer Karim Thomas joins the three senior officers and the four cops go so far as to change the angle of pictures of the accident to make it look like Torrensvilas swerved in front of the cop car and caused the accident, not Francisco.

Throughout the tape, the cops acknowledged what they are doing is illegal, but when you are the law, there is nothing wrong with bending it for a fellow cop, one says.

"I don't lie and make things up ever because it's wrong, but if I need to bend it a little bit to protect a cop, I'll do it," Pressley tells Francisco after reassuring him no one will ever find out. "She's freaking hammered anyway."

The cops even do a final rehearsal before Villa is taken to the city lock up.

"We'll take care of it," one officer says. The others reply: "We're good."

The police officers are currently on administrative duty pending a state attorney's office investigation.

[Krugerrand]

^ ^ ^ It's a good thing they didn't feel threatened and shoot her.

[AxisMundi]

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/131879_cops23.html

Cops who abuse their wives rarely pay the price

By RUTH TEICHROEB AND JULIE DAVIDOW
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS

Their wedding cake shimmered with pearls, symbolizing marital bliss. Armfuls of roses, in shades of lavender and cream, scented the hall.

During the June 2000 ceremony, Phil Rees vowed to "love and cherish" his bride.

Less than two months later, the Seattle police officer found himself under investigation for domestic violence.

That night at their Burien home, Jenifer Rees watched in disbelief as King County sheriff's deputies handed her intoxicated husband back his gun and let him drive away -- so he wouldn't miss work in the morning



Oh yeah, any old Mundane would get the same courtesy.

Good god Axis, get your nose out of the cop's ass, I could shut the board's servers down with stories like that.

Apperently you fail to note in your own article that quite a few of the reported cases do in fact have consiquences for the cop invovled, and/or his superiors.

Firstly, I will challenge you to pull up a quote of mine where I state that this sort of stuff doesn't happen at all.

However, you, and others, seem to be stating that cops are never, ever brought to justice for their crimes.

[Anti Federalist]

Apperently you fail to note in your own article that quite a few of the reported cases do in fact have consiquences for the cop invovled, and/or his superiors.

Firstly, I will challenge you to pull up a quote of mine where I state that this sort of stuff doesn't happen at all.

However, you, and others, seem to be stating that cops are never, ever brought to justice for their crimes.

I know I got beat pretty good with a nightstick once for the crime of being a biker, and nothing happened to that cop, because I didn't have the time, resources or media attention to fight it.

And no, sometimes some justice is meted out.

But take the Oscar Grant case.

If you are I did that, you can bet your ass we would be going to jail for a lot longer than 7 months.

I am making the case that any justice done to cop criminals is muted, preferential, arbitrary and not nearly as sure or as harsh as that meted out to a Mundane.

There's no arguing that.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

This "community of color" bull crap has got to stop if the "community of color" has any intention of actually eliminating racism and discrimination.

The kid assaulted the cops with a deadly weapon, his car. Police are justified in shooting.

As unfortunate as this incident is, it was the kid's choice in drinking and getting behind the wheel, and his choice in stomping on the accelorator. He is not innocent for being part of the "community of color".

And no, I am no racist. I am just sick and tired of the victim mentality and social segrigation supposed "civil rights activists" burden minorities with to further their own political and material wealth.

Indeed, if I was born pure as a baby's butt and learned all my evil ways of prejudice and racism from my parents, then just who in pray tell taught them? I am getting so sick and tired of hearing how shameful my ancestors lived by those proclaiming themselves to be their superiors, intellectually, culturally, and sophisticatedly speaking.;)

[AxisMundi]

Indeed, if I was born pure as a baby's butt and learned all my evil ways of prejudice and racism from my parents, then just who in pray tell taught them? I am getting so sick and tired of hearing how shameful my ancestors lived by those proclaiming themselves to be their superiors, intellectually, culturally, and sophisticatedly speaking.;)

Racism and prejudice are passed from parent to child. It is not a natural condition inherent within a new born. Who in pray tell taught them? Their parents of course.

BTW, anyone who fights against racism and prejudice ARE intellectually, culturally, and sophisticatedly superior to those who labor under their hatred.

[AxisMundi]

I know I got beat pretty good with a nightstick once for the crime of being a biker, and nothing happened to that cop, because I didn't have the time, resources or media attention to fight it.

And no, sometimes some justice is meted out.

But take the Oscar Grant case.

If you are I did that, you can bet your ass we would be going to jail for a lot longer than 7 months.

I am making the case that any justice done to cop criminals is muted, preferential, arbitrary and not nearly as sure or as harsh as that meted out to a Mundane.

There's no arguing that.

So you didn't mouth off at the cop then. Gotcha.

[Anti Federalist]

So you didn't mouth off at the cop then. Gotcha.

For one who is going around whining about not possibly knowing what people's motives are, you seem more than ready to do the same.

Want to know what happened?

Scenario:

Riding, not breaking any laws to my knowledge, just outside of Princeton, NJ, through pricey college town suburbs, roughly 10 PM at night.

Keep in mind this was back in the day before Tasers.

Rollers light up behind me, shit, cops.

Pull over, quiet street, no real traffic to speak of, shut down the bike and dismount.

I turn and face the cop car, two cops exit, the driver moving quickly toward me.

With arms and hands out to the side and clearly in view, I say, "What are you pulling me over for?!"

First cop bellows, "Get down on the ground, NOW!"

A nightstick blow to the side of my helmeted head, followed quickly by one just above the left knee, and one to the back of the neck as I bend over.

Commands follow to spread my arms and legs as second cop keeps his knee in my back while first cop frisks me and takes my wallet.

Then handcuffed as second cop continues to kneel on me while first cop does his cop shit with my DL and talks on the radio.

After about 20-30 minutes or so with my face in the pavement, I'm yanked up, handcuffs taken off, wallet and documents returned, and told to get back on my bike and "get the fuck out of this town".

Other than that first question, I never said another fucking word.

Even as an 18 year old kid, I knew enough to STFU around cops.

That's all, take it for what it's worth.

May that prick cop be suffering somewhere between then and now.

That fucking knee still hurts and gives me trouble from time to time.

[ammorris]

So you didn't mouth off at the cop then. Gotcha.

What if he did? Would that mean that the cop was justified in beating him? Mouthing off is not a crime, is it?