Unarmed man flags down LAPD seeking help - they shoot him in the head and handcuffing him

originally posted by: real_one
"Some dude earlier today had a gun so let's shoot this guy too"
This is why you NEVER ask the police for help.

Except what you left out is the guy earlier had his hand wrapped in a towel also.

it gives a least an idea why they may reacted that way.

a reply to: real_one

My purpose was providing an actual article. Did you read the other comment where I said the other incident doesn't exonerate this one?

Clearly not.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Can you quote me where I said that?

No, because I didn't. Citing an example of a similar incident that occurred the same day isn't an exoneration of this incident.

Spin - denied.

Glad I'm not the only one to call you out on this load of BS.

Spin denied?

It's quite obvious that your logical fallacy was exposed for every one to see.

a reply to: real_one

Zomg! You're right! My clever ruse wasn't so clever! Curses! I shall never post another link again!

Whatever dude. Typical crap. Ignore the parts you don't like, spin the ones you can.

Have a super Sunday

Man I was just on that street two days ago right in that area. Wonder if the victim had family, and wonder how this will effect them. Hopefully this man wasn't the head of household or something.

I can understand why the cops would be jumpy if they had just heard about a similar incident happening earlier in the day.

They still should have shown more professionalism than that though. One would think that they would be better at interpreting human body language or behavior.

What saddens me is that in the la times article the lapd detective said "we are going to leave no stone unturned in our investigation of this" then goes on to highlight that the guy might have been trying to commit suicide by cop. Funny how the thing they focus most on would be anything that could possibly exonerate the cop who acted in poor judgement. Basically trying to find ways to make it so this mans death (manslaughter?) Was not their fault somehow.

Like the fact they never mention if the man had anything hidden under the towel or if maybe his arm was wrapped in a towel cause he was cut or hurt and was flagging down a cop so that they could call an ambulance for some reason. Nothing that would highlight just how badly they misinterpreted the situation.

Finally I know it's policy to handcuff anybody who appears dangerous or that is being arrested but how's that work for a guy who the cops wrongfully killed. Why are they handcuffing someone who is not a criminal, in violation of any crime, and is non ambulatory cause he's dead and has half of his brain pouring out onto the concrete from a gunshot wound to the head. That's just asinine and thoughtless paint by numbers zero rational thinking policy. It's literally just plain stupid to have handcuffed the guy. And Iuts a smack in the face of the citizens of los angeles. Cops handcuff the dead who perished in a manslaughter incident? What about dead people involved in car wrecks? Do the cops open the mangled car door and handcuff the dead guy, for you know the cops safety? Wow talk about arrogant and being cognitively divorced from reality. Hey lets hand cuff a guy we mistakenly killed who's dead for our safety. What about the guy you accidently killed safety? Where's the respect for an innocent civilian? Wow talk about an us vs them mentality.

Basically all I got from reading the detectives statements is they are going to try and make this not the lapds fault if they can. It came across a little disengenous and like they aren't really interested in addressing this incident impartially, just in making it go away by sweeping it under the carpet. Which is tacit standard procedure for the lapd for a long time now.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I always thought the LA Times was a somewhat liberal leaning publication, so I was kind of surprised to see that the article was overwhelmingly "cop talk" and almost no info on the deceased.

I don't know if that's because there's not much info to present, or if it was intentional. From the way the article was written and the statements included, I have no doubt that this is going to get quietly swept away. Or at least there'll be a strong attempt at it.

I don't know if disarming police is the answer especially rural sheriffs. My county is 1600 sq. miles with 6500 people scattered all over the place. Back up is a long way away and LEOs often have to put down animals that have been hit by cars etc. Most residents are armed too so there's that.

Imo the problem with LEOs is a disconnect from the communities they serve. Members of our county sheriff's department are good community oriented people, either born raised right here or long time residents.

Just last month an eccentric old guy living out in the county was shooting at LEOs. The sheriff responded and the guy shot at him too. They took him in without killing anyone, concluded he was mentally ill and actually got him help. I refuse to hate on all police when ours do such an amazing job with such a small force.

Although whenever we leave our area, not often, other departments make me nervous because of the horror stories we read about. Residency requirements for police, imo, could make a difference.

a reply to: BASSPLYR
Do you remember when lapd shot some newspaper delivery ladies while hunting for Dorner..I wonder what came of that?

Sick situation.

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
FFS!!

Come on America FIGHT BACK
They're (the police) are MURDERING you..

They are an out of control legal gang hiding behind their badge.

Words are not gonna fix this, actions might..

All of my encounters with Police and Deputies have always been straightforward and aboveboard,for the most part they are respectful and courteous.In an abnormal situation I have seen them get hyped but that is normal for human beings.

Have had many,many encounters with the local constabulary,from shootings across the street to wildfires next door to them chasing and tackling suspects in my backyard.I have never been treated other than with respect.
I am not white,I am a minority.
Treat them the way you want to be treated solves a lot of problems.

a reply to: Sunwolf
It's a tough job..at the end of the day I think people would be less angry if there was accountability, the system is screwed and does not generaly want to prosecute even when evidence indicates there should be.
My last encounter with LE was just fine..I was cruising in my Buick which is loud and blacked out Grand National style, came around a corner and into a roadcheck..the cop came to my window and said "awesome" he just looked to see my belt was on.

a reply to: Shamrock6

You know the folks over at the la times are pretty liberal and in general pretty easy going. I used to talk regularly with some of the editors and writers for their calendar /arts and entertainment section back when I was doing PR work. So i got a pretty good feel for the general atmosphere over there.

But like most newspapers I think they have an unavowed agreement with the LEO community to pretty much only print their official story or talking points when possible.

One time I watched a lapd detective threaten to arrest the local news reporters for questioning witnesses because the witnesses statements overwhelmingly placed the lapd at fault for a near fatal car accident. There were 200 witnesses. The other party involved did nothing wrong. The news knew that it was basically a massive car accident caused by a reckless 24 year old green cop. The news reporters were threatened with arrest. So i figured the next day when I opened up the newspaper it would read, cops at fault in local near fatal accident. Or at least address the cover up. But nope said other party was 100 percent at fault. Zero wrongdoing or responsibility for the lapd. So it seems like the lapd liaison got to the editor before the story went to print, and it would point to a agreement between the lapd or Leo community and the la times. I suspect most major news papers have back room agreements like that.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

That's....shocking. And yet not, at the same time.

Thanks for the local perspective. I don't know much about LA as I've never spent any time there other than at LAX. That story has me shaking my head.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Brucee

I dont know how many of these Police brutality events need to take place before people take action into there own hands?

Fact is during the time period of 2003-2013 US Police killed 5000 civilians, the number of soldiers killed in Iraq was 4489. There is your real terrorist paramilitary force right there!

www.globalresearch.ca...

Ouch. America the land of liberty or land of perpetual war waged by police? Can't be both.

Some people will say "police kill so many people because we have so many freedoms".

And when they say it a part of my soul will be vomited onto the floor.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Shamrock6

You know the folks over at the la times are pretty liberal and in general pretty easy going. I used to talk regularly with some of the editors and writers for their calendar /arts and entertainment section back when I was doing PR work. So i got a pretty good feel for the general atmosphere over there.

But like most newspapers I think they have an unavowed agreement with the LEO community to pretty much only print their official story or talking points when possible.

One time I watched a lapd detective threaten to arrest the local news reporters for questioning witnesses because the witnesses statements overwhelmingly placed the lapd at fault for a near fatal car accident. There were 200 witnesses. The other party involved did nothing wrong. The news knew that it was basically a massive car accident caused by a reckless 24 year old green cop. The news reporters were threatened with arrest. So i figured the next day when I opened up the newspaper it would read, cops at fault in local near fatal accident. Or at least address the cover up. But nope said other party was 100 percent at fault. Zero wrongdoing or responsibility for the lapd. So it seems like the lapd liaison got to the editor before the story went to print, and it would point to a agreement between the lapd or Leo community and the la times. I suspect most major news papers have back room agreements like that.

I suspect the various intelligence agencies also plant stories in the MSM. I can't prove it or figure out how bad it is but I suspect it's happening none the less.

a reply to: butcherguy

There is no video to see or at least not in the UK

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: Brucee

I think it's time to disarm the police, criminals and other gangs and arm all responsible and legitimate citizens. It's becoming more and more obvious that weapons in the hands of police is not a viable option.

Cheers - Dave

How exactly do you expect to disarm criminals and other gangs but not "responsible and legitimate citizens" ?

Let the citizens do it, the police aren't doing the job, they're just janitors with guns and half of those bitches are paid off by the criminals anyway.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: tom.farnhill
a reply to: butcherguy

There is no video to see or at least not in the UK

Yes, it seems that the video has been taken offline - so either it was too extreme for twitter or the LAPD is trying to cover up this story.

Would be great if someone has stored it to bring it back online.

a reply to: tom.farnhill

You can still find it here. Just read this statement:

The Los Angeles Times reports the man shot did not have a gun, even though they shot him because he would not “drop the gun.”

photographyisnotacrime.com...

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Brucee

I try to make my posts contribute to the discussion at hand, but all I can say to this incident is:

For the love of God, WHY?

Probably a newsletter from FOP saying that some towels are deadly weapons, and you should immediately kill anyone with a towel, lest you fail to Go Home At The End Of Your Shift.

originally posted by: andy06shake

How long until "they" outlaw filming Police through?

Have you read the latest party-line screeds from FOP? That, and some sort of attempt to prevent any criticism of LEOs is on the way. I've read a couple of "manifestos" this week from local FOPites that are, let's say, eerily similar, leading me to think it's coming from FOP central.

The Cop Tale of the day is that any criticism of them, filming of them, or increased oversight of them will lead to hesitation of the fine officers, as they wonder 'hey, is what I'm doing actually legal or am I pulling this out of my ass?', at which point said hesitation immediately leads to Not Going Home At The End Of Your Shift.

Thus, said recording, criticism, or oversight is an attempt to kill them, and leaves said criticizer with "blood LITERALLY DRIPPING FROM THEIR HANDS" as one FOP mouthpiece stated.

Both 'manifestos' had creepy implied threats about how the cops were tired of having to listen to it, and thus any evildoer found criticizing LEOs would be "thoroughly investigated immediately and appropriate action taken" and the like.

There was also a veiled threat that they just might be shooting the copblock contingent on sight under the 'cell phone gun' theory.

eta: oh, and off the top of my head, I seem to remember a dose of "look what you're going to make me do" in there that's relevant here. "We're going to be all super sensitive and ANYTHING that looks threatening, we shoot you first, since you guys decided to shoot a few of us. That ought to teach you", or something to that effect.