CA police beat man to death as he begged for life, seized videos

[mrjarrell]

It was not a " summary execution".

The hell it wasn't.

 

[Mark 1911]

What if the attackers had not been wearing uniforms? Would the use of deadly force on the part of the victim been justified to stop the attack? I think the answer is a definite "yes". Say the attackers had been an outlaw motorcycle gang, this type of criminal behavior is more typical of that segment of humanity than of police officers. Had a motorcycle gang attacked this man rather than the police, I bet most police departments would not even press charges if the victim had shot and killed the attacker.

 

[rockhopper46038]

The victim would have been justified in the use of deadly force in that circumstance, regardless of the attackers wearing uniforms. They were killing him.

 

[Mark 1911]

The victim would have been justified in the use of deadly force in that circumstance, regardless of the attackers wearing uniforms. They were killing him.

Exactly. My point is without the uniforms nobody would even question the use of deadly force to stop the attack. So why the inability of so many to see past the uniforms in this case? Like you said, they were killing him and so it should be treated as criminal behavior.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

I didn't read the whole thread or watch the videos and I'm not saying I agree with eight guys serving up a beat down (if that's what happened) .

Two simple words would stop ALL (most) of these kinds of reports

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY or alternatively risk mitigation , plain and simple .

You wanna get drunk / high / whatever , do it at home .

Get drunk / high / whatever in public and your chances of meeting a cop increases .

It really is just that simple .

 

[IndyDave1776]

It was not a " summary execution".

I didn't read the whole thread or watch the videos and I'm not saying I agree with eight guys serving up a beat down (if that's what happened) .

Two simple words would stop ALL (most) of these kinds of reports

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY or alternatively risk mitigation , plain and simple .

You wanna get drunk / high / whatever , do it at home .

Get drunk / high / whatever in public and your chances of meeting a cop increases .

It really is just that simple .

Are you two serious?

I believe in personal responsibility but spending a prolonged time beating an unresponsive man to death is MURDER any way you slice it. There is no threat posed by an unresponsive individual, hence no way in the universe to justify killing him for being guilty of a misdemeanor prior to commencement of the beating. This is a deliberate act willfully made by the police involved, meets any definition of summary execution I understand, and is indefensible by any but the most dedicated of police groupies who would defend absolutely anything so long as it is done by someone with a badge.

I am particularly disturbed by the above-mentioned implication that if a person is guilty of being less than perfect in any way, it is perfectly right for the police to carry out any damned extrajudicial penalty/execution they see fit. With people like you two supposedly on our side, I fear greatly for the cause of liberty.

You may wish to review the fact that there are penalties on the books for public intoxication. None of them involve being executed on the street without trial or conviction.

 

[lucky4034]

I didn't read the whole thread or watch the videos and I'm not saying I agree with eight guys serving up a beat down (if that's what happened) .

Two simple words would stop ALL (most) of these kinds of reports

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY or alternatively risk mitigation , plain and simple .

You wanna get drunk / high / whatever , do it at home .

Get drunk / high / whatever in public and your chances of meeting a cop increases .

It really is just that simple .

I can't stand how the knee jerk reaction is to always place the blame on the individual as if they simply aren't the victim of a heinous crime. These cops shouldn't have done it... there is no justification for it. Period.... Whether the guy was high or drunk or even took a swing at one of the officers... there is no excuse for beating him to death the way described. This wasn't a single blow that accidentally took a life... this was men bashing the guys skull as he pleaded for mercy and help. At some point he went from resisting (if he was) to submitting, to unconscious, to cold and lifeless....

There are other posts in similar threads that echo the same thing... "Had the guy not gotten out of his car he wouldn't have gotten his head smashed."

Comments like these are excuses for misbehavior.... It is not acceptable in any way shape or form for ANYONE... let alone uniformed officers to do this.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

I didn't read the whole thread or watch the videos and I'm not saying I agree with eight guys serving up a beat down (if that's what happened) . QUOTE]

With people like you two supposedly on our side, I fear greatly for the cause of liberty..

Comments like these are excuses for misbehavior.... .

RED , in case you guys missed it the first time .

I've never had a cop beat my ass , care to guess why ?

Cause I don't act a fool in public , plain and simple .

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

2admnlover -
This is kind of a double edged sword. You've never been beat down - because you've not acted a fool in public. I grant, that would prevent many a situation like this.

By the same token - you have to admit that there have been people who have been beaten simply for being black/white/[insert race of choice here]. People have been beaten for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

BOTH THINGS can happen - and have happened. Your "solution" works for some percentage of the situations. But not ALL. So all that you propose is to lessen the odds of it happening.

Police are given the power to detain people. Sometimes people resist - and that leads to justifiable shootings , etc. A "beat down" crosses that line. It is a thin but VERY important line. Our civilized society rests on that line. They are given the power to detain, BUT NOT TO ADMINISTER JUSTICE. Period. It is appropriate to wait for the facts before judging - but it IS fair to say that given what we are seeing "Lucy's got some 'splaining to do..".

 

[Birds Away]

I didn't read the whole thread or watch the videos and I'm not saying I agree with eight guys serving up a beat down (if that's what happened) .

Two simple words would stop ALL (most) of these kinds of reports

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY or alternatively risk mitigation , plain and simple .

You wanna get drunk / high / whatever , do it at home .

Get drunk / high / whatever in public and your chances of meeting a cop increases .

It really is just that simple .

The same could be said for carrying a firearm. There are plenty of negative interactions with LEOs over that legal activity. Do you mitigate the risk of negative interaction by leaving it at home?

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

BOTH THINGS can happen - and have happened. Your "solution" works for some percentage of the situations. But not ALL. So all that you propose is to lessen the odds of it happening.
.

To me this is a simple matter , what kind of attention do you want , good or bad ?

It's your personal responsibility to ensure you have enough self discipline to keep yourself in check outside your house .

If you don't and you act a fool in public you'll get the wrong kind of attention .

I have a hard time believing that 99% of the cops out there just eff with folks for no reason .

I'm not saying this guy (in the op) deserved what he got (without knowing all the facts) but I'm willing to bet it all started with HIS PUBLIC STUPIDITY .

If a man cannot or will not govern himself in a manner that is publically acceptable , he will be governed .

 

[IndyDave1776]

To me this is a simple matter , what kind of attention do you want , good or bad ?

It's your personal responsibility to ensure you have enough self discipline to keep yourself in check outside your house .

If you don't and you act a fool in public you'll get the wrong kind of attention .

I have a hard time believing that 99% of the cops out there just eff with folks for no reason .

I'm not saying this guy (in the op) deserved what he got (without knowing all the facts) but I'm willing to bet it all started with HIS PUBLIC STUPIDITY .

If a man cannot or will not govern himself in a manner that is publically acceptable , he will be governed .

I can agree in part so far as that it is reasonable to expect people to act civilized in public, even if they are just acting. I would have had no problem with this man spending the night in the drunk tank or even some rough handling if he were uncooperative with the effort to take him into custody. The other side of the coin is that having police conduct themselves like mad dogs is far more unacceptable and dangerous than a stray drunk. Public responsibility and self-discipline are at least as applicable to cops as to drunks, much in the same way that in a school incident, we expect the staff to behave in a more mature and responsible manner than the students.

I am not going to argue the percentages of good vs. bad cops, but there are plenty of bad ones to keep us in a steady supply of stories of this nature. Why then should any reasonable person not enter into any contact with law enforcement expecting a significant likelihood of something of this nature happening? After all, being killed on the spot is a pretty steep punishment for public intoxication, never mind the absence of any due process whatsoever.

 

[KG1]

It's pretty simple actually. Are we all not held accountable according to the law if we continue to beat on someone past the point of where they are no longer a viable combatant? I see no difference in what happened in this incidence and I feel the officers should be held equally accountable for their actions.

 

[IndyDave1776]

It's pretty simple actually. Are we all not held accountable according to the law if we continue to beat on someone past the point of where they are no longer a viable combatant? I see no difference in what happened in this incidence and I feel the officers should be held equally accountable for their actions.

 

[Hotdoger]

The hell it wasn't.

You can show that they beat him with intent to kill him?


NO YOU CAN'T.


So YOUR statement is TOTAL BS!

 

[IndyDave1776]

You can show that they beat him with intent to kill him?


NO YOU CAN'T.


So YOUR statement is TOTAL BS!

Try again. How can you argue that anyone but the most severely retarded (which those officer act as if they may have been) could beat someone into an unresponsive condition and continue beating him without the intention to kill him? If they did not intend to kill him, for what other reason would they continue the beating past the point of complete unresponsiveness? Please don't try telling us that they still hadn't met the required amount of time spent in physical exercise for the day, so they kept swinging until the clock struck the appropriate time.

 

[Hotdoger]

Try again. How can you argue that anyone but the most severely retarded (which those officer act as if they may have been) could beat someone into an unresponsive condition and continue beating him without the intention to kill him? If they did not intend to kill him, for what other reason would they continue the beating past the point of complete unresponsiveness? Please don't try telling us that they still hadn't met the required amount of time spent in physical exercise for the day, so they kept swinging until the clock struck the appropriate time.

So all the beatings you have described have ended in death?
the answer is no they don't.

"summary executions" do.

so try again yourself.

 

[IndyDave1776]

So all the beatings you have described have ended in death?
the answer is no they don't.

"summary executions" do.

so try again yourself.

Not all shooting end in death. As that goes, not all hangings ended in death. So, in your world, barring a signed confession, there is no intent?

History is full of autocrats who would have loved you.

 

[Hotdoger]

Not all shooting end in death. As that goes, not all hangings ended in death. So, in your world, barring a signed confession, there is no intent?

History is full of autocrats who would have loved you.

Stop with the personal attacks .

How many executions have not ended in death then?

Define "execution" for me too.

 

[mrjarrell]

You can show that they beat him with intent to kill him?


NO YOU CAN'T.


So YOUR statement is TOTAL BS!

They deliberately and callously beat the man to death. To argue otherwise, with the evidence at hand and their tampering with the evidence they illegally confiscated, shows a blatant misunderstanding of the what happened according to witness statements. Even their boss called in the FBI. Your failed attempt to cover for these murderers calls your "logic" and thinking into question.