Manhunt for ex-LA cop suspected of shooting 3 cops and killing 2 others

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Rather than simply dismiss her as a vindictive ex,

I didn't dismiss her as a vindictive ex. I simply posed the possibility of her being one.

"and who's the say that this girlfriend isn't some lunatic that wants revenge on her ex?"

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Your inherent prejudices are obvious. You instantly credit the word of a murderer who leaves a twenty page rant but call an ex-girlfriend's allegations "tripe" even though they are facially no more or less credible than his.

Considering there has been other cases and other people that back up his claims of corruption(I even posted one), I'll take his word on this subject. Even if he is deranged or crazy, his claims are most likely valid considering what we've seen from the LA police.

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

In my over 20 years, and as to the hundreds of legislators, lawyers and judges with whom I have worked, there has never been a situation where I witnessed or even suspected corruption. Stupidity, incompetence and individual dishonesty - yup. Is this proof that corruption is non-existent? of course not. It is, to me anyway, proof that it is not as pervasive as some folks tend to think.

Really? Which is why even in this small town I live in, I've heard a current campus cop that has been black balled by the force simply because he called out another cop for excessive force? Mind you, this guy pulled the offending officer to the side and did it in private, and STILL that officers superior and fellow buddies backed him. This guy was such a menace on the force that he had claim after claim about abusive force, yet the department kept sweeping it under the rug allowing it to go on. This same guy caught on camera at one of our football games body slamming a student. (he's no longer allowed to ever work football games)

LiveLeak.com - Police Caught Abusing Fans Who Rushed Field After ECU-WVU Game (comments)

Yes JR, instead of taking a guy like that off the force, they've covered up for him and continued with the foolish "Thin Blue Line" that cops go by. Don't rat your co-workers out even if they are doing wrong.

I don't know what kind of cases you work, but it's not indicative of reality if you don't think officers and cops lie for one another. Also, do you think they are going to tell YOU (a lawyer) the truth?....lol

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Of course you do - he may be a murderer, but he is a murderer who preaches to your choir so he must be right. To me, based on the entirety of his ramblings and his murderous actions, I find him to be an individual who perceptions are deeply and inherently flawed and, thus, find his words to carry as much weight as the paper on which they are printed and no more.

No, he preaches something that's been shown over the course of time that's followed a pattern of corruption and even reflected by another man's book. That's our problem with our system, we've passed off everybody that made a claim as some idiot, nutjob or mental case with a agenda. How about maybe they are correct, and we start implementing videos on ALL cops (much like the Atlanta mall cop) to get the true story.

I have no problems with cops, I have a problem where our system continues to cover up the misdeeds of their officers when they are out line instead of correcting them. As far as federal or other law enforcement agencies investigating it? That's a joke. Goes back to that code they follow. Give me a independent investigation from a team that has no ties or follows no unwritten code. Even if the federal investigations are legit, do you actually think cops are going to testify on other cops? About like our government "investigating" the Wall Street banks....LOLOL

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

LOL. You post tripe from a "ex" girlfriend as a character assassination? Wow...lol

No offense JR, but judicial system is just as complicit and crooked as the cops. Judges and lawyers are bought off all the time and to think otherwise is simply being naive. Being paranoid doesn't make you wrong, and who's the say that this girlfriend isn't some lunatic that wants revenge on her ex?

Furthermore, I'm absolutely sick and ****ing tired of every time somebody exposes something, they are "deranged" or "crazy". You know what's crazy? Allowing corrupt cops and lawyers to continue running a corrupt system where the cops can do whatever they want and nothing happen.



Executed. Yet this cop was cleared.

Wrongful-death lawsuit filed against LA County Sheriff's Department in fatal shooting | abc7.com



How many cops were sentenced for this?



None.


I believe Dorner more than I do crooked cops and judges, who continue to cover up crimes commited by LA law enforcers.

Seems the cop was a good shot. One less thug off the street.


"Was he armed? Yes. Is the whole story being told now? No. Let's not forget who has already investigated this: Internal Affairs, Office of Independent Review monitoring that. Homicide Bureau. The District Attorney," said Sheriff's Spokesman Steve Whitmore.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Seems the cop was a good shot. One less thug off the street.


"Was he armed? Yes. Is the whole story being told now? No. Let's not forget who has already investigated this: Internal Affairs, Office of Independent Review monitoring that. Homicide Bureau. The District Attorney," said Sheriff's Spokesman Steve Whitmore.

Wrong. They had no finger prints on the gun at all. Secondly, it's clear the guy posed no threat because he was running away, hence he was shot in the back. Two other witnesses were there that say otherwise. Just because they are "cleared" doesn't make them not guilty.

Segall-Gutierrez says Cuevas' fingerprints were not on the gun the department claims he was carrying, and questions its authenticity.

The fact that the officer stands over him after he is down and shoots again makes this a murder. The story doesn't even make sense either. So the cop wants us to believe that this guy pulled a gun on him, but ran away after he pulled the gun? Nobody in their right mind believes that.

Surveillance video shows deputy shooting of Lynwood man | 89.3 KPCC

Please. FD, have some class man. Calling the guy a thug and shit, yet you have no idea what his record or past is.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

...

You know, I work in the legal system every day. Have done so for over 20 years now. Although I work in the civil side, I have defended Troopers in tort cases from auto-accidents to excessive force matters. In my over 20 years, and as to the hundreds of legislators, lawyers and judges with whom I have worked, there has never been a situation where I witnessed or even suspected corruption. Stupidity, incompetence and individual dishonesty - yup. Is this proof that corruption is non-existent? of course not. It is, to me anyway, proof that it is not as pervasive as some folks tend to think.
...

I edited a lot of your stuff out so that I could focus on this statement. Corruption avoids honest workers like the plague. No one is going to give a hint of something unlawful or corrupt in front of you, because you would report it - and they know it. I know you aren't a "goody two shoes" but your ethics are pretty straight forward and no one would begin to bring you into any of those type conversations.

There are more than enough reported cases to say that the fact that it hasn't crossed your path in over 20 years mainly says that those who are carrying it on simply make an effort to exclude you from any involvement, even tangentially.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Wrong. They had no finger prints on the gun at all. Secondly, it's clear the guy posed no threat because he was running away, hence he was shot in the back. Two other witnesses were there that say otherwise. Just because they are "cleared" doesn't make them not guilty.




The fact that the officer stands over him after he is down and shoots again makes this a murder. The story doesn't even make sense either. So the cop wants us to believe that this guy pulled a gun on him, but ran away after he pulled the gun? Nobody in their right mind believes that.

Surveillance video shows deputy shooting of Lynwood man | 89.3 KPCC

Please. FD, have some class man. Calling the guy a thug and shit, yet you have no idea what his record or past is.

Well if the cop saw his gun that would be a good reason to shoot him when he is standing over him and would actually support his story.Actually people in their right mind believe what these dumb ass kids do that get them killed everyday. He has a gun running from a cop who was a good shot. THUGGGGGGGGG

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Well if the cop saw his gun that would be a good reason to shoot him when he is standing over him and would actually support his story.Actually people in their right mind believe what these dumb ass kids do that get them killed everyday. He has a gun running from a cop who was a good shot. THUGGGGGGGGG

Is there any possible way you watched that security tape? I don't know all the details, but there are certain things that are clear, one being that the cop was in control of the situation once he was on the ground, and the last shot was excessive. Even if he had his gun near his body, the cop would certainly have been able to dislodge it without another shot, or back away and call for backup. I have to agree with NC_Skins on this one, that last shot should have been enough to bring serious charges down on the officer.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Is there any possible way you watched that security tape? I don't know all the details, but there are certain things that are clear, one being that the cop was in control of the situation once he was on the ground, and the last shot was excessive. Even if he had his gun near his body, the cop would certainly have been able to dislodge it without another shot, or back away and call for backup. I have to agree with NC_Skins on this one, that last shot should have been enough to bring serious charges down on the officer.

So you can tell me where the gun is at the time he fired the last shot? When your carring a gun and run from the cops at that point you have put yourself in the postion to be shot. That cop has the right then to protect his life and make it home to see his kids grow up.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

So you can tell me where the gun is at the time he fired the last shot? When your carring a gun and run from the cops at that point you have put yourself in the postion to be shot. That cop has the right then to protect his life and make it home to see his kids grow up.

you can tell me he had a gun? I can tell you he is face down on the ground, and severely incapacitated. I can tell you that at the point the first round struck him he was running away, and not threatening the officer directly. I can tell you that as he came up the collapsed figure didn't make significant direct actions to indicate that he had the ability to threaten the officer without the officers ability to react. No, you don't "Put yourself in a position to be shot" when running. That's not the way the law works. If you are in a position to threaten a life with the gun then you put yourself in a position position to be shot, but again, you can tell he was not threatening any close by bystanders.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

you can tell me he had a gun? I can tell you he is face down on the ground, and severely incapacitated. I can tell you that at the point the first round struck him he was running away, and not threatening the officer directly. I can tell you that as he came up the collapsed figure didn't make significant direct actions to indicate that he had the ability to threaten the officer without the officers ability to react. No, you don't "Put yourself in a position to be shot" when running. That's not the way the law works. If you are in a position to threaten a life with the gun then you put yourself in a position position to be shot, but again, you can tell he was not threatening any close by bystanders.

So no one has ever turned anfd fired shots while running. No one has ever been hit then returned fire. You must have the best eyes in the world because what you say is so clear is not clear at all. When a gun is involved all thing are off the shelf. If he had not run and listened to the cop we would not be having this conversation.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

So no one has ever turned anfd fired shots while running. No one has ever been hit then returned fire. You must have the best eyes in the world because what you say is so clear is not clear at all. When a gun is involved all thing are off the shelf. If he had not run and listened to the cop we would not be having this conversation.

You can see the cop firing several shots once he is on the ground, and not in a responding position. I don't really care if some person in past history has turned and fired, this man was not doing that, he is in a full sprint. Keep in mind, no one view shows everything, but still somethings seemed fairly obvious to me.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

You can see the cop firing several shots once he is on the ground, and not in a responding position. I don't really care if some person in past history has turned and fired, this man was not doing that, he is in a full sprint. Keep in mind, no one view shows everything, but still somethings seemed fairly obvious to me.

Well to be honest the video is not very clear and that's why its debated on what happened. My view of the video as police runs to the person he is starting to sit up some so who knows. It was reviewed by several agencies outside of where the event happend and they cleared the cop. You also have the fact that the kid took of running so he triggered the entire event and cost him his life.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Well to be honest the video is not very clear and that's why its debated on what happened. My view of the video as police runs to the person he is starting to sit up some so who knows. It was reviewed by several agencies outside of where the event happend and they cleared the cop. You also have the fact that the kid took of running so he triggered the entire event and cost him his life.

Again, running from the police is not authorization to use deadly force. Not in any state in the US.

As for him being cleared, that's the point of contention that started this discussion. You can't use "the panel cleared him" as the defense against "the panel and review process of police shootings is flawed".

And I still say what is clear in the video is:

• that the officer shot a fleeing suspect in the back
• that while moving toward the suspect who was on the ground, the officer fired at least two more times while the suspect was down and not in a position to shoot the police officer
• Once the police officer is close to the suspect he fires one more bullet at near point blank range

[Daseal]

I'd really like to see police forces be forced to put Internal Affairs into a 3rd party group. For some reason, I don't trust cops judging cops.