Tucson, We Have a Problem

[gunowner930]

screw the helmet cam. We know the man is dead. We know who killed him. Seriously, all they have to do is unseal the warrant. If everything's kosher, as much as I despise what happened, it would at least show that the service of the warrant itself was legitimate. Sealing all documentation and asking us to just accept the official story is rife with sinister undertones. Instead of pursuing a course that is consistent with the best public policy and interaction with the citizens FOR WHOM THE TUCSON PD WORK, they choose rather to engage in a course of secrecy and protectionism. What else can the public assume than that they are hiding their mistakes in a clear-cut case of CYA, move along, nothing to see here?

I've said it before, I'll say it again...this case stinks to high heaven, and it's likely the Guerena family will never see anything resembling justice. Shades of Amadou Diallo.

+1

Is Sheriff Dump going to blame this on "right wing vitriol" too?

 

[88GT]

It was not. Unless you consider a writ of assistance without identifying information in accordance with the Constitution of the United States valid. No name =/= valid
No address =/= valid




Pure conjecture on your part, based on nothing more than the statements of the lawyer for the SWAT team members involved.

Interesting though that when it serves your purpose, you so quickly and easily latch on to statements unverified by evidence; but when the same party makes a claim that refutes or contradicts your claims, you ignore it like an old girlfriend.

KS, why are you ignoring every post I make which mentions that the lawyer for the SWAT members has admitted that the warrant was bogus?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

We will never see it. Its also going to show him being shot 22 times. Releasing it is a lose lose.

It seems to me the only reason you don't release the tapes is if they are damning to the person that possesses them.

Lose lose for who?

The government might lose because we could find out that they again lied. Lied about seeing a gun; lied about hearing him yell; lied about the ND. OK, that's one loser.

Who's the other loser? The Marine is already dead. He's already lost. So it doesn't matter to him. So who is the other loser?

The real loser is the citizens who don't get an open and transparent view of their government in action.

Then again the police could be exonerated. And the people get to see it. Wouldn't that be a win win?

 

[Stschil]

I agree. I do think it will be released when the [STRIKE]investigation[/STRIKE] document and statement doctoring is complete. As it should be.

FIFY

 

[Keyser Soze]

FIFY

No? actually you didn't? Why is this necessary?

 

[Keyser Soze]

It seems to me the only reason you don't release the tapes is if they are damning to the person that possesses them.

Lose lose for who?

The government might lose because we could find out that they again lied. Lied about seeing a gun; lied about hearing him yell; lied about the ND. OK, that's one loser.

Who's the other loser? The Marine is already dead. He's already lost. So it doesn't matter to him. So who is the other loser?

The real loser is the citizens who don't get an open and transparent view of their government in action.

Then again the police could be exonerated. And the people get to see it. Wouldn't that be a win win?

I see where you are coming from let me try to elaborate on why it is a lose lose. Even if he would have got a shot, or several shots off rather the general public does not want to see someone getting shot 22 times. Also it obviously would not exonerate the police. There are several people here that have stated even if the gun was pointed at officers the killing was unjustified. Therefore reinforcing my opinion it is a lose lose to release the video.

Again regardless the marine ( i'll just call him a person) is dead. That is tragic regardless. What do they possible have to gain from killing him? Do you think they woke up that morning and felt the need to kill someone..Stop..think...and put yourself in the situation. Regardless of what you think of the warrant itself, justified or no......Your starring at the business end of an AR-15...what do you do? Squint and try to see if its on safe?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What do they possible have to gain from killing him?

1. His inability to testify.

2. Increases in funding.

3. The spiked head effect.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

KS, why are you ignoring every post I make which mentions that the lawyer for the SWAT members has admitted that the warrant was bogus?

I'm not certain I would go that far. Just because they did not find anything does not make the warrant bogus.

I sure want to see that warrant though. The fact that I cannot is deeply disturbing.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I see where you are coming from let me try to elaborate on why it is a lose lose. Even if he would have got a shot, or several shots off rather the general public does not want to see someone getting shot 22 times. Also it obviously would not exonerate the police. There are several people here that have stated even if the gun was pointed at officers the killing was unjustified. Therefore reinforcing my opinion it is a lose lose to release the video.

Again regardless the marine ( i'll just call him a person) is dead. That is tragic regardless. What do they possible have to gain from killing him? Do you think they woke up that morning and felt the need to kill someone..Stop..think...and put yourself in the situation. Regardless of what you think of the warrant itself, justified or no......Your starring at the business end of an AR-15...what do you do? Squint and try to see if its on safe?

Who is anyone else in a government position to tell us what the public wants, or doesn't want to see? Are we children that need the temperature of our milk taken before we drink it? No, we aren't. It's not that the public doesn't want to see it. It's that the police do not want the public to see someone get shot 22 times, especially if they didn't get a shot off first (or ever). This sheriff has already given the STFU order to the media. Withholding the tapes is simply a checklist item in his plan to control messaging.

Several people is not everyone. I would like to see the perspective of the lead since it's as close as I can get to the perspective of the dead Marine. Instead we are given a 1 minute video and told no more.

Jose Geurena is dead. That is tragic. On that single point we agree. The thought processes of those that ended his life are irrelevent. I do want to know why they chose to let him die. Officer safety is a bull s**t answer. If it was a SWAT officer down they would have driven their APC through the wall to get him. That infuriates me, and as far as I am concerned there is no excuse. Did his actions contribute to his death? Probably. However, there was a bevy of obvious errors, some of which were tactical in nature occuring on the ground which likely led to his death. The effort should be to determine how to ensure that no one else is killed in their house while protecting their family again, not on circling wagons, withholding information, changing stories, and slandering dead Marines.

 

[Bunnykid68]

What did I miss and where? Now he has only been shoot 22 times? WTF?

 

[NYFelon]

Well, since they only shot him 22 times, it just makes the shoot that much more righteous.

 

[E5RANGER375]

I see where you are coming from let me try to elaborate on why it is a lose lose. Even if he would have got a shot, or several shots off rather the general public does not want to see someone getting shot 22 times. Also it obviously would not exonerate the police. There are several people here that have stated even if the gun was pointed at officers the killing was unjustified. Therefore reinforcing my opinion it is a lose lose to release the video.

Again regardless the marine ( i'll just call him a person) is dead. That is tragic regardless. What do they possible have to gain from killing him? Do you think they woke up that morning and felt the need to kill someone..Stop..think...and put yourself in the situation. Regardless of what you think of the warrant itself, justified or no......Your starring at the business end of an AR-15...what do you do? Squint and try to see if its on safe?

what do they have to gain? intimidation of the people. you cant deny that a lot of agencies relish it. a huge police presence at an event is just that ... intimidation. (like the 4th amendment rally at the statehouse)
what do they have to lose from killing him? nothing. we all have seen the "justice" that is dealt to cops who even in court are proven to be in the wrong. they most times keep their damn jobs. its ridiculous. a lot of police dont fear any repercussions and have even admitted it here before.

I dont want police to be scared to the point where they dont do their job, but I do want them to be afraid of ****ing up and breaking the law. i want them to be terrified of breaking the law as a matter of fact. its sad that integrity doesnt seem to work with some of these cops, maybe REAL consequences for bad actions will. come illegaly into some peoples houses and you will see REAL consequences no matter who you are and rightly so. thats called natural law.

 

[Bunnykid68]

WHY DIDN'T THEY STOP HIM GOING TO OR FROM WORK AND SERVE THE WARRANT ON THE HOME WHILE NO ONE WAS THERE.

Why won't anyone come up with a decent response to this post? I am not the only one that has asked it.

The ones defending the cops on this whole screwed up thing need to answer this. Even with an opinion.

 

[Benny]

What did I miss and where? Now he has only been shoot 22 times? WTF?

I could swear I read that ~60 of the 71 shots landed and that's why it was "justified."

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

What did I miss and where? Now he has only been shoot 22 times? WTF?

It's hard to keep the lies straight when there are so many.

Yeah, he was hit 22 times out of 71 shots. According to KS this must now be ruled a bad shoot since he was actually shot far fewer times than previously [STRIKE]believed[/STRIKE] reported by police.

 

[E5RANGER375]

It's hard to keep the lies straight when there are so many.

Yeah, he was hit 22 times out of 71 shots. According to KS this must now be ruled a bad shoot since he was actually shot far fewer times than previously [STRIKE]believed[/STRIKE] reported by police.

thats laughable. (and sick). any true professional knows what i mean. if i lived there id be demanding some training and firings of some cops. how do you get on a SWAT team sucking that bad?

 

[Keyser Soze]

What did I miss and where? Now he has only been shoot 22 times? WTF?

Yes. 22 times. Believe it or not the media tends to exaggerate.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Yes. 22 times. Believe it or not the media tends to exaggerate.

I just assumed that was the departments statement since so many of their other statements have kept changing since day 1

 

[orange]

Yes. 22 times. Believe it or not the media tends to exaggerate.

And believe it or not people like you tend to run with those exaggerations and use them for justification. He was shot 60 times? Wow, that accuracy must mean good shoot!

 

[Keyser Soze]

Why won't anyone come up with a decent response to this post? I am not the only one that has asked it.

The ones defending the cops on this whole screwed up thing need to answer this. Even with an opinion.

I answered your post immediately? It takes a lot of man hours and intel to arrest someone outside of their home. Same goes for executing a search warrant when the property is empty. You need a good spotter to watch the house to ensure the suspect, and no one else is inside. Sometimes this is done, often its not....a calculated risk.