Anonymous Wants Justice For 13 Year Old. Demands Release of Identities of the Cops

reply to post by fixer1967


You know, you bring up an outstanding point I haven't thought of since the stupid laws were first passed on blaze orange markings for toys.

Just what is to stop some creative criminal from taking some obnoxious orange nail polish and putting a nice orange tip on a live weapon, so it can be mistaken ...perhaps only for a split second...for a toy? In a confrontation, that split second can decide who walks away and who is carried away, after all.

I couldn't agree more on the point of defining "orange tip is toy" vs. "No tip is real" creating a MORE dangerous situation than existed before hand. Looking for that stupid orange marking takes precious fractions of a second which could be better spent looking at other details ...when a couple seconds is likely all the time someone has in the real world to decide if they should laugh at a joke ...or fire to save their lives.

areyouserious2010
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

Witnesses. Not Police Officers. Witnesses said the police ordered him to drop the gun before they shot.

Let's also not forget that it was not just the police officers that told him to drop it. I saw an interview on CBS news yesterday where a witness also told him to drop it when he saw the offices roll up behind him even before the police were out of the car and instructing him to drop it as well. In trying to find that video, all I could now find is a mention of it in this ABC News piece ( Calf. Community Questions Shooting of 13 Year Old ). It is mentioned around the 1:10 mark by the news caster right before the interview with the same witness I saw in the CBS news piece.

As to the premise of the thread... sure.. let Anon print the names IF they (and others calling for the same) are willing to accept the responsibility for any possible violence done to the officers or their families by doing so or God forbid there be a case of mistaken idenity that results in any harm to a truly innocent person. So go ahead, grab your torches and pitch forks and have at it. If you want that kind of blood on your hands, go for it. Personally I would rather see more evidence before making any such call for action. But seeing how our new de facto moral compass (Anon) has put out the hue and cry for outting them BEFORE a completed investigation then by all means join the hunt, let the chips fall where they may and the innocent who may be caught up in it by no fault of their own be damned. Good plan.

For those saying "He was only 13!!! It was a TOY gun!!" I leave you with this CBS News video of another eye witness who appears at the 1:20 mark. Teen Shot and Killed by Police while Carrying a Toy Rifle

Common sense on ALL sides of this tragic incident would have made this a non story with a totally different result.

GrantedBail
Anonymous is demanding that the Santa Rosa Police Department release the names of the shooters. They have discovered the names and identities of the officers that shot this boy for carrying a toy assault rifle. They have given the department 48 hours to release the information or they will.

I'd guess that the odds of the police releasing that information are pretty much zero, as there is no incentive for them to do so -- if anonymous really has the names, the police releasing the names accomplishes nothing, and if anonymous does not have the names, there's no reason to give them out. And looking at it rationally, what are the odds that anonymous has the two deputies names? Probably about zero.

reply to post by GrantedBail


Anyone
who remains "anonymous" is not willing
to put it on the line and are suspect to hidden agendas, Anonymous to me is a government opposition controlled psyops, that is used to incite violence, what will exposing the names of these officers do, but make them subject to violence duh!! It is totally skipping the root of,the issue a corrupt police force, where was Anonymous for the Trayvon Martin case? Anonymous is a fake movement that only desires to rile up the people, an example of psy op, stirring up the people, and not revealing who you are, or offering solutions just causing trouble = Psy ops

reply to post by boncho

The last article I read on the case the police were holding up an airsoft gun next to a legit AK showing how much they looked alike,

They did not look alike unless you were blind. It is easy to spot the toy since it has a much thicker barrel.

Does anyone know if the kid was facing them?

Does anyone know if the kid was acting in a threatening manner?

Those are the two top questions that need to be answered.

onequestion
Does anyone know if the kid was facing them?

Does anyone know if the kid was acting in a threatening manner?

Those are the two top questions that need to be answered.

They came up behind the kid.

They told the kid to drop it and at least two witness claim Deputy Erick Gelhaus, 48 fired without giving the kid time to drop it.

The cops did not identify themselves as cops!

The gun was dropped and the front of the cheap plastic toy broke the father claimed. The front sight is missing from the gun, without it you could not really aim the gun!

The deputy that shot the kid is a firearms expert, trains officers on the use of weapons, and has posted in threads where the topic has been what to do if you shoot an unarmed person, and the advice given was to claim you were in fear of your life and of others....

reply to post by crimvelvet


I agree that they don't look the same, this photo doesn't have the resolution to show one is clearly plastic.



The red arrow points to the part of the gun that was broken when it was dropped. The green arrow shows the front sight that is need to aim the gun.

reply to post by Dav1d

The deputy that shot the kid is a firearms expert, trains officers on the use of weapons, and has posted in threads where the topic has been what to do if you shoot an unarmed person, and the advice given was to claim you were in fear of your life and of others....

What threads? Are you saying he's posted on ATS or somewhere else?

We disagree on this case, obviously, as the major thread running on this story shows...but I'm certainly interested in where people are saying he's posted online? I'd be curious to see just what he's said for how it may indicate general approach and professionalism.

thanks for any links, if you have some to share on that.

The sheriff's deputy who shot dead a 13-year-old boy carrying a toy gun last week has been identified as a hunter, war veteran and firearms enthusiast who once urged other officers to turn on the 'mean gene' if they found themselves in 'the kill zone.'
Officials confirmed on Monday Erick Gelhaus, 48, was the Sonoma County sheriff's deputy who mistook Andy Lopez's fake AK-47 for a real rifle before he fatally shot the teen last Tuesday just outside Santa Rosa.
The deputy, who has received death threats after the incident that sparked outrage in the California community, has broad experience with guns and regularly contributed to law enforcement magazines and online forums, warning his comrades that they may be required to use lethal force to stay safe.
According to his online profiles, Gelhaus served as an infantry squad leader in Iraq and is an avid hunter in North America as well as Africa.

...But in a 2008 article for monthly policing and gun rights magazine, S.W.A.T., he gave other officers advice on what to do if the possibility arises.

'Today is the day you may need to kill someone in order to go home,' he wrote. 'If you cannot turn on the 'mean gene' for yourself, who will? If you find yourself in an ambush, in the kill zone, you need to turn on that mean gene.'
He went on: 'Taking some kind of action - any kind of action - is critical. If you shut down (physically, psychologically, or both) and stay in the kill zone, bad things will happen to you. You must take some kind of action.'


Source

He has a history of seeing assault weapons that are not assault weapons too. He once testified in a trial as an expert on weapons, claiming a gun was an assault weapon when it was not! He also posted in threads where the topic was what to do if you shoot and unarmed person, and the suggestion was to claim you were afraid.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Last year I fought an AW case in Sonoma County and won. They tried to get a felony conviction for an off list lower with a bullet button (ten round mag inserted, had to show the officers how to remove it) and other charges for having high cap mags in the vehicle.

I know for a fact that the D.A. and the Sonoma S.O. are familiar with bullet buttons and AW identification because I taught them. It cost me about 7 thousand dollars out of pocket but I won and they dropped all charges. They also returned all of my property.

That S.O. has a guy named Eric Gelhouse (sp?) that was listed as their "Firearms Expert". He looked at my rifle and called it an unregistered AW. That was what started my nightmare. I provided my lawyer and the D.A. with a copy of the DOJ AW ID guide. I had pages relating to my rifle and magazines tabbed, and sentences highlighted. I also provided them with a copy of the Sacramento P.D. training bulletin about AW's and bullet buttons.

Then, right there in front of the judge, in a moment I will never forget as long as I live, the DA stood there and said "Yeah so he had one of those button things on the gun but that doesn't matter he had high cap mags in the vehicle and they would have been easy to load".

That's when they offered me a deal of 1 year probation, no jail time, and they keep the rifle and my Kimber 1911. I said no deal let's please just hurry up and go to trial, then they dropped the charges completely and returned my property.

The point is that I know this particular county SO and DA know about off list lowers, high cap mags and bullet buttons.

I would be happy to do whatever I can to help with this case by testifying and or providing the CGF with any information from my case that might be helpful.

Marc

Source

Google his name he was a moderator on several gun sites, he has requested all his post be hidden on many gun sites. But yesterday if you Googled his name you could get a feel for his mindset, I believe. I find it interesting that he posted (since removed) on several threads about what to do if you should happen to shoot an unarmed person. Where the consensus seemed to be to claim you were fearful of lost of life to your self and others!

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Writing under his real name on the forum The Firing Line, Gelhaus wrote under a thread entitled "He's got a gun! ... A bb gun..." that: It's going to come down to YOUR ability to articulate to law enforcement and very likely the Court that you were in fear of death or serious bodily injury. I think we keep coming back to this, articulation -- your ability to explain why -- will be quite significant.

Read more at: www.heavy.com...

Last year I fought an AW case in Sonoma County and won. They tried to get a felony conviction for an off list lower with a bullet button (ten round mag inserted, had to show the officers how to remove it) and other charges for having high cap mags in the vehicle.

I know for a fact that the D.A. and the Sonoma S.O. are familiar with bullet buttons and AW identification because I taught them. It cost me about 7 thousand dollars out of pocket but I won and they dropped all charges. They also returned all of my property.

That S.O. has a guy named Eric Gelhouse (sp?) that was listed as their "Firearms Expert". He looked at my rifle and called it an unregistered AW. That was what started my nightmare. I provided my lawyer and the D.A. with a copy of the DOJ AW ID guide. I had pages relating to my rifle and magazines tabbed, and sentences highlighted. I also provided them with a copy of the Sacramento P.D. training bulletin about AW's and bullet buttons.

Then, right there in front of the judge, in a moment I will never forget as long as I live, the DA stood there and said "Yeah so he had one of those button things on the gun but that doesn't matter he had high cap mags in the vehicle and they would have been easy to load".

That's when they offered me a deal of 1 year probation, no jail time, and they keep the rifle and my Kimber 1911. I said no deal let's please just hurry up and go to trial, then they dropped the charges completely and returned my property.

The point is that I know this particular county SO and DA know about off list lowers, high cap mags and bullet buttons.

I would be happy to do whatever I can to help with this case by testifying and or providing the CGF with any information from my case that might be helpful.

Marc
Source

Check the main thread on this for my post yesterday, I've link to some. If you googled him yesterday you could get a feel for his mindset I believe. He is actively requesting his post be removed and many sites are complying. He is covering his past. He was a moderator on several gun sites I believe based on threads I've read. His post for the most part appear to be hidden, but there were some still showing if you go back far enough on Google.

reply to post by Dav1d


Well, I appreciate the reply. That does give a bit more take on his thinking and position.

I seriously doubt he's ignorant as a side note. That's what he'd have to be, to think having his posts removed from active sites today would mean anything whatsoever in making them go away. I have two different sites bookmarked which ought to bring up what he had in the past. There are a few that archive and save everything on the net.

I'd drop out of sight and off any boards I cared about though, if I were in his position. The media coverage alone makes his mere presence a toxic thing to any site he touches as more than a passing user, especially as staff.

I'd bet he cares about the sites he put time into helping, and that's why he's dropping off. Just my hunch. He's a cop though...which means seeing all the tricks of Defense attorneys and just how much doesn't vanish as many people think it can...is just part of the job for him.

I was doing a bit of research and found this tidbit halfway down.
www.lapdonline.org...

Racial discrimination was commonplace, protected under an 1850 state law and upheld by the state’s Supreme Court as follows: "No black or mulatto person, or Indian, shall be permitted to give evidence in favor of, or against, any white person. Every person who shall have one-eighth part or more of Negro blood shall be deemed a mulatto and every person who shall have one-half of Indian blood shall be deemed Indian." Later, under the same reprehensible statute, all Asians suffered a similar denial of human rights.

From the police state and the lack of discipline for brutality, shakedowns and outright murder it Looks like they reenacted the law without the taxpayers knowing it only they simplified it to simply...

"No non LEO shall be permitted to give evidence in favor of, or against, any LEO"

Am I wrong?

ThePeaceMakerHowever put yourself in the cops shoes, you've just shot a 13 year old boy you are not exactly going to be over the moon with it. You've got to live the rest of your life remembering that day you shot a boy with a toy gun.

Those psychopaths will sleep just fine.
Why do you think they join the force in the first place?

reply to post by Dav1d


The internet wayback machine is a wonderful thing if the site is there.

Try doing screen captures if the sites and save them if you find them.

FWIW I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling about heavily armed men with a licence to kill with impunity cringing and crying that they were scared.

boymonkey74
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

I would like to know If the toy gun had one...and If so why didn't the cops see it?
Anyhow even If the cops names are given what are anonymous going to do?
I just hope If found that the cops acted disproportionately they get what is coming to them.

Father stated that the kids gun got dropped and it had broken off.

XionZap

boymonkey74
reply to post by GrantedBail

 

I would like to know If the toy gun had one...and If so why didn't the cops see it?
Anyhow even If the cops names are given what are anonymous going to do?
I just hope If found that the cops acted disproportionately they get what is coming to them.

Father stated that the kids gun got dropped and it had broken off.

Correct, and that would also influence his decision as to drop or not drop his toy, when told to drop it by police who failed to identify themselves as police...

GrantedBail
reply to post by boncho

 

You are correct. I misspoke. I could have sworn I read that the gun did a couple of days ago. The gun did not have an orange tip:

Andy was carrying the gun in his left hand at his side as he was walking, Henry said. At a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Henry displayed the gun Andy was carrying alongside a real AK-47 assault rifle.

Andy’s gun had a thinner barrel that was 6 to 8 inches shorter than the real rifle and was colored differently but was missing the orange plastic tip that typical differentiates a fake gun from a real one.

Link

We'll never know if it did or not. But kids can remove those as well and often break guns or change them for costumes.

Its irrelevent, the whole thing was outrageous and I kept thinking of my 12 and 14 year old, wanting toy guns and bb guns for props to make youtube videos from zombie games with their freinds.

Those cops would be facing me for life and this is MURDER, by monsters.

reply to post by Dav1d

They told the kid to drop it and at least two witness claim Deputy Erick Gelhaus, 48 fired without giving the kid time to drop it.

Source?

The cops did not identify themselves as cops!

First, source?

Second, Police Officers who are confronting an armed subject do not have to identify themselves as police before firing. If they are in plain clothes it is probably a good idea but not required.

Police in general are trained to challenge the person before firing but that also is not required if the officer believes it will take away their tactical advantage.

We already know the cops told him to drop the weapon twice based on independent witness testimony. That is sufficient.

The gun was dropped and the front of the cheap plastic toy broke the father claimed. The front sight is missing from the gun, without it you could not really aim the gun!

Did the front sight break off when the kid dropped it after being shot?

Even without the front sight on the gun, the weapon looks real enough. Especially when one is dealing with this kid on the street, at distance.