- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Man Arrested for Gunning Down Cop Who Climbed in Through His Window at 5:30am
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:08 pm to DanTiger
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:08 pm to DanTiger
quote:
That is not an accurate statement.
True but I am speaking in generalities. I have heard of many innocent people being killed by cops but rarely hear of murder charges being pressed. Its more of a whoops our mistake and the taxpayers pay a large wrongful death suit to the victims family.
I am not a cop basher either...just making observations.
No way the shooter gets charged if intruder was a burglar.
0
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:08 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Police have become a military force. You are the enemy.
Paraphrasing Chris Rock, I'm not looking in the rear-view for drug dealers, I'm looking for cops. And no I'm not a criminal.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:47 pm to supatigah
Yes, I think for me to decide in this case it would require that info and even more so, I want to know what was found in the home after the raid.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:50 pm to wahoocs
Title: Annie Rae Dixon
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: TX
Description: 84-year-old Annie Rae Dixon, a bedridden paraplegic, is shot and killed after police officers from the nearby town of Kilgore break into her Tyler, Texas home. They have the wrong address. Police later say one raiding officer's weapon "accidentally" discharged, firing the bullet that struck and killed Dixon. A jury would later acquit the raiding officers of any wrongdoing. Sources: Carol J. Castaneda, "Texas community again divided; Shooting ignites new racial tension," USA Today, August 21, 1992, p. A10. Robert Suro, "Police Shooting Focuses Black Anger in Texas City," New York Times, August 10, 1992, p. 10. "Jury refuses to indict officer in black woman's death," United Press International, July 11, 1992.
Date: Jan 29, 1992
Posted on 6/25/14 at 12:53 pm to wahoocs
quote:
Yes, I think for me to decide in this case it would require that info and even more so, I want to know what was found in the home after the raid.
From the article...
quote:
The evidence sheet lists a laptop, a safe, a pistol, and a glass pipe, but no drugs were found.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:01 pm to Bleeding purple
Title: Kenneth Baulch
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: TX
Description: On February 14, 1991, police storm the mobile home of 26-year-old Kenneth Baulch. Baulch is asleep with his 17-month-old son when police wearing all black clothes and ski masks break into the trailer. Police first confront Baulch's brother, Michael Baulch, Jr. They were acting on an informant's tip that there were drugs in the apartment. According to a lawsuit later filed by the family, Michael Baulch tried to warn police that his brother and nephew were asleep, but was told, "Shut your fricking mouth, or I'll blow your fricking brains out." The same officer then kicked down the bedroom door and immediately fired three shots, hitting Kenneth Baulch in the back, killing him. Baulch was holding an ashtray in his left hand. Police say he used it to attack the officer, though Baulch's family says he's right-handed, a smoker, and that subsequent investigations show Baulch was walking away from the door when he was shot. Michael Baulch was charged with misdemeanor marijuana possession, the only charge to result from the raid. A subsequent internal affairs and grand jury investigation found no wrongdoing on the part of the officer who shot Kenneth Baulch. Sources: Tracy Everbach, "Family sues Garland officer over '91 fatal shooting; Internal investigation, grand jury cleared policeman," Dallas Morning News, January 28, 1993, p. A23.
Date: Feb 14, 1991
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: TX
Description: On February 14, 1991, police storm the mobile home of 26-year-old Kenneth Baulch. Baulch is asleep with his 17-month-old son when police wearing all black clothes and ski masks break into the trailer. Police first confront Baulch's brother, Michael Baulch, Jr. They were acting on an informant's tip that there were drugs in the apartment. According to a lawsuit later filed by the family, Michael Baulch tried to warn police that his brother and nephew were asleep, but was told, "Shut your fricking mouth, or I'll blow your fricking brains out." The same officer then kicked down the bedroom door and immediately fired three shots, hitting Kenneth Baulch in the back, killing him. Baulch was holding an ashtray in his left hand. Police say he used it to attack the officer, though Baulch's family says he's right-handed, a smoker, and that subsequent investigations show Baulch was walking away from the door when he was shot. Michael Baulch was charged with misdemeanor marijuana possession, the only charge to result from the raid. A subsequent internal affairs and grand jury investigation found no wrongdoing on the part of the officer who shot Kenneth Baulch. Sources: Tracy Everbach, "Family sues Garland officer over '91 fatal shooting; Internal investigation, grand jury cleared policeman," Dallas Morning News, January 28, 1993, p. A23.
Date: Feb 14, 1991
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:03 pm to NYNolaguy1
I'm sure Perry will get involved and exonerate this gentleman. Perry fights for liberty and will see this was just a gun totin Texan sneaking in the wrong gun totin Texan's window.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:04 pm to Bleeding purple
Title: Pedro Oregon Navarro
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: TX
Description: Six police from Houston's anti-gang task raid the home of Pedro Oregon Navarro. Officers storm his bedroom, where Navarro awakes, startled and frightened, and reaches for his gun. Police open fire and shoot Navarro twelve times, killing him. His gun was never fired. Police found no drugs or evidence of drug use or sale in Navarro's home. Police obtained Navarro's address after pulling over a car of three men, one of whom they arrested for public intoxication. Already on probation, the suspect offered a "tip" on a nearby drug dealer in exchange for his release. Police agreed to the bargain, and obtained Navarro's address from the suspect. The officers who shot Navarro were fired. Only one was charged. A jury took about an hour to acquit him of misdemeanor criminal trespass. In August of 2005, two of them applied for reinstatement, adding that they'd hoped to be 'vindicated' of the Navarro shooting. Sources: Tim Lynch, "Another Drug War Casualty," Cato Daily Commentary, Cato Institute, November 30, 1998. Steve Brewer, "Officer Cleared in Oregon Case," Houston Chronicle, March 26, 1999. "2 ex-officers hoping to be 'vindicated'; Pair fired after Oregon shooting seek reinstatement," Houston Chronicle, August 25, 2005, p. B4.
Date: Jul 12, 1998
HOLY shite IT IS A SCARY WORLD OUT THERE
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: TX
Description: Six police from Houston's anti-gang task raid the home of Pedro Oregon Navarro. Officers storm his bedroom, where Navarro awakes, startled and frightened, and reaches for his gun. Police open fire and shoot Navarro twelve times, killing him. His gun was never fired. Police found no drugs or evidence of drug use or sale in Navarro's home. Police obtained Navarro's address after pulling over a car of three men, one of whom they arrested for public intoxication. Already on probation, the suspect offered a "tip" on a nearby drug dealer in exchange for his release. Police agreed to the bargain, and obtained Navarro's address from the suspect. The officers who shot Navarro were fired. Only one was charged. A jury took about an hour to acquit him of misdemeanor criminal trespass. In August of 2005, two of them applied for reinstatement, adding that they'd hoped to be 'vindicated' of the Navarro shooting. Sources: Tim Lynch, "Another Drug War Casualty," Cato Daily Commentary, Cato Institute, November 30, 1998. Steve Brewer, "Officer Cleared in Oregon Case," Houston Chronicle, March 26, 1999. "2 ex-officers hoping to be 'vindicated'; Pair fired after Oregon shooting seek reinstatement," Houston Chronicle, August 25, 2005, p. B4.
Date: Jul 12, 1998
HOLY shite IT IS A SCARY WORLD OUT THERE
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:04 pm to Ed Osteen
quote:
Why the hell would a SWAT team member be sneaking into a suspected drug dealers house like some ninja?
I've met a few SWAT team members in La and GA. They really think they are some king of Delta force / Navy Seals special ops unit. None of the guys I met had ever gone through any military training. They go out into the country and run simulations and training scenarios, but these guys just don't have the smarts or the elite reaction speeds of the real special op teams. Yet they attempt to carry out the same missions.
Note - I'm sure there are some ex-military and ex-SOPS in the police force. I'm sure there are very nice, upstanding, compassionate officers as well.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:07 pm to schexyoung
quote:I'm sure there are aliens, but those haven't been found either.
I'm sure there are very nice, upstanding, compassionate officers as well.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:16 pm to supatigah
quote:
I would love to know what the evidence was that prompted the judge to issue the no knock warrant
In the case where the flash bang blew a hole in that 2 year old, the no-knock warrant was issued on the account of a CI who claims he bought drugs in the very room the child was sleeping in hours before, and there was no crib nor sign of a child.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:18 pm to Bleeding purple
quote:
Police later say one raiding officer's weapon "accidentally" discharged, firing the bullet that struck and killed Dixon.
So either he killed her on purpose, and he's a murderer, or he's too fricking stupid to understand trigger discipline and basic firearms safety, and unfit to wear the badge.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:23 pm to DanTiger
Title: Salvador Hernandez
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: OR
Description: On August 2, 1996, police storm the home of 62-year-old Salvator Hernandez on a drug raid. The raid is part of a broader raid that morning involving 47 police officers and federal agents. Hernandez, who is nearly deaf, is making breakfast for himself and his friend, 54-year old Bortolo Pineda. According to police, as they entered the home, Hernandez took the knife he was using to make breakfast and "lunged" at them with a "menacing" look on his face. According to Pineda, Hernandez didn't hear the police shouts, and had turned to get some sausage from the refrigerator. Police opened fire, and hit Hernandez in the chest five times, killing him. Hernandez was a farmworker described by friends and his employer as a "good man," and a "good worker." He had no criminal record, and in fact had been a police officer in Mexico before coming to America. He was a grandfather of 21 and a great-grandfather of one. There were no drugs on his person or in his system. Just days later, a grand jury would clear the raiding officers of all charges, ruling that they had reason to believe their lives were in danger. Salem police pointedly refused to apologize for Hernandez's death. Sources: Cheryl Martinis, "Two Salem officers kill 63 year-old," The Oregonian, August 3, 1996. Laura Trujillo, "Jury clears police in fatal shooting," The Oregonian, August 8, 1996. Laura Trujillo, "Police in Salem decline to apologize," The Oregonian, August 9, 1996. Laura Trujillo, "The Shooting of Salvador Hernandez," The Oregonian, Septebmer 1, 1996.
Date: Aug 2, 1996
In all of these wrongful death descriptions of an innocent that I've read from that site, the officers were acquitted. Typical or the agenda of the site?
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: OR
Description: On August 2, 1996, police storm the home of 62-year-old Salvator Hernandez on a drug raid. The raid is part of a broader raid that morning involving 47 police officers and federal agents. Hernandez, who is nearly deaf, is making breakfast for himself and his friend, 54-year old Bortolo Pineda. According to police, as they entered the home, Hernandez took the knife he was using to make breakfast and "lunged" at them with a "menacing" look on his face. According to Pineda, Hernandez didn't hear the police shouts, and had turned to get some sausage from the refrigerator. Police opened fire, and hit Hernandez in the chest five times, killing him. Hernandez was a farmworker described by friends and his employer as a "good man," and a "good worker." He had no criminal record, and in fact had been a police officer in Mexico before coming to America. He was a grandfather of 21 and a great-grandfather of one. There were no drugs on his person or in his system. Just days later, a grand jury would clear the raiding officers of all charges, ruling that they had reason to believe their lives were in danger. Salem police pointedly refused to apologize for Hernandez's death. Sources: Cheryl Martinis, "Two Salem officers kill 63 year-old," The Oregonian, August 3, 1996. Laura Trujillo, "Jury clears police in fatal shooting," The Oregonian, August 8, 1996. Laura Trujillo, "Police in Salem decline to apologize," The Oregonian, August 9, 1996. Laura Trujillo, "The Shooting of Salvador Hernandez," The Oregonian, Septebmer 1, 1996.
Date: Aug 2, 1996
In all of these wrongful death descriptions of an innocent that I've read from that site, the officers were acquitted. Typical or the agenda of the site?
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:23 pm to wadewilson
Cops are out of control.
In particular the "wanna-be" special forces operators who consider themselves SWAT teams that need to shoot innocent people, flash-bang babies, and do things like print PUNSIHER logos on their "tactical gear".
Yes, a town of 3k people needs an MRAP, two snipers, and artillery. I'm sure Ms. Johnson's call about the neighborhood kids running through her garden was actually AlQaeda planning a nuclear attack.
Good thing HS dropout 1 and 2 went and shot at trees in the woods last weekend and have cool black tactical gear!
In particular the "wanna-be" special forces operators who consider themselves SWAT teams that need to shoot innocent people, flash-bang babies, and do things like print PUNSIHER logos on their "tactical gear".
Yes, a town of 3k people needs an MRAP, two snipers, and artillery. I'm sure Ms. Johnson's call about the neighborhood kids running through her garden was actually AlQaeda planning a nuclear attack.
Good thing HS dropout 1 and 2 went and shot at trees in the woods last weekend and have cool black tactical gear!
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:24 pm to Peazey
quote:
Typical
most never even get to trial. Most of the DA's take it before a grand jury and it gets tossed there because the DA is on the same side as the scum.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:25 pm to wadewilson
quote:
So either he killed her on purpose, and he's a murderer, or he's too fricking stupid to understand trigger discipline and basic firearms safety, and unfit to wear the badge.
With no disciplinary action taken at all. That's what happens when you let cops police themselves.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:26 pm to Rickety Cricket
quote:
With no disciplinary action taken at all. That's what happens when you let cops police themselves.
you dont understand. Their job is hard. Only another psycopath who likes to shoot dogs chained in their backyard knows the true pressure this filth is under.
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:29 pm to wadewilson
LINK
Every cop in the assault where the 2 year old was hurt should be fired. The one who threw the flash bang should be charged with attempted murder (upgraded to murder if the child dies).
Every cop in the assault where the 2 year old was hurt should be fired. The one who threw the flash bang should be charged with attempted murder (upgraded to murder if the child dies).
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:37 pm to LSU0358
yea but what they don't tell you is that the 2 year old held his fingers up like a gun, and since it was dark, the cops feared for their lives and shot the armed suspect. plus do we even know if the kid had any priors? he could've been gang affiliated. did he have any tear drop tats?
Posted on 6/25/14 at 1:41 pm to TH03
Title: Donald Scott
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: CA
Description: In an early morning drug raid on October 2, 1992, 31 officers from five police agencies break down the door to the multimillion dollar home of Donald Scott. Frightened, Scott's wife screams, "Don't shoot me. Don't kill me." Hearing his wife's screams, Scott emerges from his bedroom holding a handgun, still groggy from a recent cataract operation. When Scott raises the gun in the direction of the police intruders, the raiding officers shoot him dead. Despite assurances from the L.A. Sheriff's Department that Scott was farming more than 4,000 marijuana plants on his property, thorough search of Scott's property fails to yield any contraband. In fact, Scott's friends would later say he was adamantly opposed to illicit drugs. Though Scott's grand Malibu ranch is in Ventura County, California, no Ventura police agency was represented among the five police agencies (the L.A. Sheriff's office, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Border Patrol, the National Guard and the National Park Service) that conducted the raid. A blistering subsequent investigation by Ventura County district attorney Michael Bradbury suggests why. Bradbury found gross misstatements of fact, omissions, and outright falsehoods in the application for a search warrant issued by the L.A. sheriff's department. He found that the department had conducted numerous investigations of the ranch, including flyovers and firsthand visits, which found no evidence of marijuana cultivation. Finally, during a low-level flyover one DEA agent suggested to the sheriff's department that he had spotted some plants beneath tree cover that might be marijuana -- but stipulated that his observation ought not be the basis of a search warrant. On that evidence, the L.A. sheriff's department obtained its warrant. Bradbury concluded that, confirming Donald Scott's fears, the L.A. sheriff's department conducted its raid for the purpose of seizing Donald Scott's property through drug asset forfeiture laws. Under federal law, the department would have been able divvy up proceeds from the $2.5 million ranch with the four other agencies joining in the investigation. Bradbury found documents in which the investigating agencies had expressed desire for Scott's land on various "wish lists," and one notation in which sheriff's department officials had taken note of the recent sale value of one parcel of Scott's land. According to an L.A. deputy district attorney at the time, two of the agents conducting the raid posed for a triumphant photograph after Scott was shot and killed. In January 2000, the L.A. Sheriff's Department settled with Scott's family for $5 million, though the terms of the settlement admitted no wrongdoing. In fact, officers from the department who conducted the raid have insisted from the beginning that both the raid and the shooting of Scott were justified, despite the absence of any illegal substances. L.A. Sheriff's Department Captain Larry Waldie told the Los Angeles Times, "I do not believe it was an illegal raid in any way, shape or form." Five years after the raid, Garry Spencer, the officer who both led the raid and who killed Scott told the same paper, "I don't consider it botched. I wouldn't call it botched because that would say that it was a mistake to have gone there in the first place, and I don't believe that." Sources: Michael Fessier, Jr., "Trail's End; Deep in a Wild Canyon West of Malibu, a Controversial Law Brought Together a Zealous Sheriff's Deputy and an Eccentric Recluse. A Few Seconds Later, Donald Scott Was Dead," Los Angeles Times Magazine, August 1, 1993, p. 26. Michael D. Bradbury, Report on the Death of Donald Scott, Office of the District Attorney, County of Ventura, State of California, March 30, 1993. "Fair End in Police Abuse Case," Los Angeles Times, editorial, January 13, 2000, p. B9. Daryl Kelley, "Ventura D.A. Says Fatal Raid Was Unjustified," Los Angeles Times, March 30, 1993, p. A1. Scott Hadly, "Officer criticized over 1992 raid still wants vindication," Los Angeles Times, December 3, 1997, p. B3.
Date: Oct 2, 1992
Type: Death of an innocent.
State: CA
Description: In an early morning drug raid on October 2, 1992, 31 officers from five police agencies break down the door to the multimillion dollar home of Donald Scott. Frightened, Scott's wife screams, "Don't shoot me. Don't kill me." Hearing his wife's screams, Scott emerges from his bedroom holding a handgun, still groggy from a recent cataract operation. When Scott raises the gun in the direction of the police intruders, the raiding officers shoot him dead. Despite assurances from the L.A. Sheriff's Department that Scott was farming more than 4,000 marijuana plants on his property, thorough search of Scott's property fails to yield any contraband. In fact, Scott's friends would later say he was adamantly opposed to illicit drugs. Though Scott's grand Malibu ranch is in Ventura County, California, no Ventura police agency was represented among the five police agencies (the L.A. Sheriff's office, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Border Patrol, the National Guard and the National Park Service) that conducted the raid. A blistering subsequent investigation by Ventura County district attorney Michael Bradbury suggests why. Bradbury found gross misstatements of fact, omissions, and outright falsehoods in the application for a search warrant issued by the L.A. sheriff's department. He found that the department had conducted numerous investigations of the ranch, including flyovers and firsthand visits, which found no evidence of marijuana cultivation. Finally, during a low-level flyover one DEA agent suggested to the sheriff's department that he had spotted some plants beneath tree cover that might be marijuana -- but stipulated that his observation ought not be the basis of a search warrant. On that evidence, the L.A. sheriff's department obtained its warrant. Bradbury concluded that, confirming Donald Scott's fears, the L.A. sheriff's department conducted its raid for the purpose of seizing Donald Scott's property through drug asset forfeiture laws. Under federal law, the department would have been able divvy up proceeds from the $2.5 million ranch with the four other agencies joining in the investigation. Bradbury found documents in which the investigating agencies had expressed desire for Scott's land on various "wish lists," and one notation in which sheriff's department officials had taken note of the recent sale value of one parcel of Scott's land. According to an L.A. deputy district attorney at the time, two of the agents conducting the raid posed for a triumphant photograph after Scott was shot and killed. In January 2000, the L.A. Sheriff's Department settled with Scott's family for $5 million, though the terms of the settlement admitted no wrongdoing. In fact, officers from the department who conducted the raid have insisted from the beginning that both the raid and the shooting of Scott were justified, despite the absence of any illegal substances. L.A. Sheriff's Department Captain Larry Waldie told the Los Angeles Times, "I do not believe it was an illegal raid in any way, shape or form." Five years after the raid, Garry Spencer, the officer who both led the raid and who killed Scott told the same paper, "I don't consider it botched. I wouldn't call it botched because that would say that it was a mistake to have gone there in the first place, and I don't believe that." Sources: Michael Fessier, Jr., "Trail's End; Deep in a Wild Canyon West of Malibu, a Controversial Law Brought Together a Zealous Sheriff's Deputy and an Eccentric Recluse. A Few Seconds Later, Donald Scott Was Dead," Los Angeles Times Magazine, August 1, 1993, p. 26. Michael D. Bradbury, Report on the Death of Donald Scott, Office of the District Attorney, County of Ventura, State of California, March 30, 1993. "Fair End in Police Abuse Case," Los Angeles Times, editorial, January 13, 2000, p. B9. Daryl Kelley, "Ventura D.A. Says Fatal Raid Was Unjustified," Los Angeles Times, March 30, 1993, p. A1. Scott Hadly, "Officer criticized over 1992 raid still wants vindication," Los Angeles Times, December 3, 1997, p. B3.
Date: Oct 2, 1992
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News