"Police Officer Shootings" by Daily Crasher

SDaniels May 8, 1:34 a.m.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30630652/?gt1=43001

Josh, you've probably already heard, but Drew Peterson has been arrested--at least for the murder of his third wife.

Yessss. What is interesting is that they've got him (indicted) for the non-accidental death of his third wife, but nothing said about the missing 23-yr old pregnant fourth. They must be busting a hump to try and get a case there, but figure they can at least hold him meanwhile. In that article, his son claims Peterson had an 'airtight' alibi. Hmm. Can't wait to hear about that.

People everywhere named Peterson are surely tsk tsking; another guy who couldn't represent!

JoshBoard May 4, 12:52 a.m.

One is the lonliest number that you've ever seen.

One, one one one one, can be as sad as one, it's the lonliest combination since the number one (sung to Three Dog Night).

Another problem, Magic...It's kind of like people that are obsessed with astrology. They are convinced that if it says "You will experience pain today," in their horoscope, that that will happen. Well, guess what? It becomes a self-fulfilling proficy, as you might stub your toe on the coffee table and think...AHA!!! That's it! That was the pain!

Or, it could be a guy breaking up with you. It could be you biting your tongue or burning your mouth on a hot piece of pizza.

You see, if you look at the clock around 2:23, you don't remember that. But once you throw a "1" into it, you're convinced now there's something going on.

JoshBoard May 8, 2:10 a.m.

I love it!!! I heard this on the radio today, and almost crashed my car with excitement. The judge made it a $20 million dollar bail, too.

JulieParrots April 19, 5:05 p.m.

Hey, I totally agree with you, J. The police have to deal with so many unruly and often violent people when they are called upon to diffuse a situation. Without them having firearms to protect the rest of us how can they stop people that are much better armed, such as those persons who have a history of being involved in drug trafficking, etc.

SurfPuppy619 April 19, 5:25 p.m.

Margaret Mitchell and LAPD are two names you need to google.

If you're an old man or woman with mental issues then the police need to have the proper training to deal with them- and shooting them is not a real good option.

bluenwhitegokart April 19, 7:06 p.m.

For the most part, I agree with you, Josh. Back in the old days, criminals knew not to mess with the po-lice. This kinder, gentler crap has been the fertilizer for a more vicious, hardened criminal element.

RE: the City Beat. So far, the online feedback at City Beat is 1 outstanding letter (which I'm surprised they printed - get it while it's still there), and one moronic "the poor, gentle compassionate old soul wouldn't hurt a fly and the cop needs to be held accountable."

Like I said, get it while it's still up there: http://www.sdcitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/this_week_s_feedback/7972/

Mindy1114 April 19, 9:38 p.m.

Good post, Josh. I agree 100%. Society needs to get back to using common sense. In 1988, my stepson was depressed. When he couldn't get cops to shoot him, he pulled out a gun and started shooting into a mobile home park. The cops had to let him have it. The family, get this, wanted to sue for wrongful death. The kid asked to die. Maybe if people would "pull their heads out of their asses" when it comes to their kids, cops wouldn't have so much trouble.

kellydavis April 19, 9:42 p.m.

Oh jesus christ. You people made me sign up for a Reader account. Thanks. First, gokart: We don't delete web comments unless they fit the legal definition of libel. As for the rest of ya, here's what I sent The Comma Mangler, er, Party Crasher. (I replaced all the naughty swear words lest god smite me for soiling Jim Holman's holy website):

Josh,

Have you read through all the police records on Jacob Faust's death? No, you haven't. Don't assume to know what happened until you've done that. Have I? Yep. I've spent hours reviewing police investigative files, witness statements, talking to family members, talking to police, reading the autopsy report, looking at photographs. You've done none of that. So shut your pie hole. You saying that Jake deserved to die was disgusting and pathetic.

As far as Mr. Zavala is concerned, get your facts straight: He did not have a knife; he had picked up a shard of glass. He was locked inside the home where he lived with his nephew. No one else was inside. The landlord did not call the police. His caretaker asked a neighbor to call the police after she'd locked him in the house. He threatened her with a stove burner because she wouldn't give him a cigarette. This happened in San Ysidro, not Chula Vista. He had been diagnosed with dementia and had been out of the hospital for two days when this happened. If you have any experience with someone with Alzheimers, dementia, or a traumatic brain injury, you'd know that a request for something as simple as a cigarette can escalate. The solution is not to aggress on the person or try to reason with them. You give in to their simple request. I know this from personal experience. You obviously don't. Police experts agree that you DO NOT shoot tasers at elderly people. The SDPD shot a taser at Mr. Zavala. You do not shoot bean bags at close range because of the chance that they'll pierce a person's skin. A beanbag penetrated Mr. Zavala's groin area. Nice, huh? He was wearing a diaper, too. If you knew anything about police practices in dealing with mentally ill individuals, you'd know that TIME and DISTANCE are key. Take your time (Mr. Zavala was given less than 17 minutes to comply) and keep your distance while you try to figure out what's driving the person to do what they're doing. The police could have safely stayed outside the home, which had bars on the windows, while waiting for professional help to arrive. This is about the failure of a health care system under which a critically ill 87-year-old man cannot afford proper long-term care.

The least you can do is check your facts, idiot. And, while you're at it, learn how to frackin' spell (L-O-U-I-S-I-A-N-A) and learn how to use punctuation.

Now, go crawl back in your hole.

xoxo,

Kelly Davis Associate Editor San Diego CityBeat

magicsfive April 19, 9:57 p.m.

I DO have nearly 20 years experience with... well, MOST of my patients have suffered from Alzheimer;s, Dementia, Huntington's, i worked at CMH...I have years of experience with the mentally ill.. and your answer? "Give in to their simple request?" my god I hope you're not in the health care field. "Giving in" might work in some small instances, but if someone is or is putting someone else in danger, they need to be removed from the situation to a place of safety...and don't get me wrong, I am not saying that they should be killed. but didn't you say he had a shard of glass? what, that can't be a weapon? if he doesn't use it as a weapon, he could have certainly hurt himself with it. And where was his caretaker again? i have nothing more to say to you on the subject. Good day.

mike1 April 19, 10:32 p.m.

Josh,

Let me start with the cliches...there are good cops and bad cops and cops who are better trained than others and yes they are all human beings. And yes if I need help I will call them. And they no doubt have to deal with bad people all the time. And I don't think citybeat is anti-cop. Should we just assume the cops are always right and not ask questions?

It does seem to me that whenever I hear a story about an investigation into a police shooting, the verdict is in the cop's favor. I don't know all the facts on Jacob so I can't say what was in the cop's minds or if it looked like he was reaching for something. Yes if you're stopped you shouldn't make any movement that could be misconstrued. I'm sure people get nervous when pulled over and don't think clearly. Car registrations are usually kept in the glove compartment. (Not saying this appies to Jacob's case.)

As far as the old man is concerned, I assume cops are trained to deal with these situations. Did they really think they were in danger from an 87 year old man in a diaper even if he had a shard of glass? They couldn't have have aimed for his legs? I find it hard to believe there was no other way out of this.

Julieparrots...how ironic that the mind boggling number of guns and the criminalization of drugs (two right wing favorites)make us need the police even more. (Law enforcement and the military, another one.) And Mindy, your son pulled out a gun and started shooting. No one would argue that the cops would be justified in taking out a person who does that. And I'm sorry about your stepson.

kellydavis April 19, 11:14 p.m.

His caretaker locked him in the house. Did you not read closely? Bottom line: If she'd have given him the cigarette he was asking for, the situation would not have escalated. For someone who's mentally ill, it might be different, but for someone with a traumatic brain injury, dementia or Alzheimers, give 'em the frickin' cigarette or bowl of ice cream or TV remote. Don't tell me that you've never come across that scenario in your 20 years in county mental health.

DavidRolland April 19, 11:18 p.m.

Apparently, this blogger, whoever he is, is still learning the ins and outs of blogging and hasn't yet heard about the latest fad that's sweeping the blogosphere. It's called linking, and it miraculously allows people to read for themselves what the blogger's gassing on and on about.

Here's an itty-bitty version of url of the CityBeat editorial:

http://tiny.cc/Jvz1x

kellydavis April 19, 11:20 p.m.

One more thing: As far as a shooting being considered "justified": The District Attorney conducts a review, based on police investigative records, and concludes whether or not an officer is criminally liable. If an officer can prove that he or she felt that his or her life, or someone else's life, was in danger, the shooting is considered justified. The DA does not evaluate or comment on policies, procedures or training.

JoshBoard April 20, 12:12 a.m.

Surfp: I have all the sympathy in the world for people with mental problems. But when they're out in public and endanger people, the sympathy goes out the window. The cops, from what I've seen, heard, and read, have extensive training. Should they have 8 years of training, so they are taught every possible scenario that may turn up? It's just not possible.

Mindy: I'm sorry about your step-son. And sorry if that lead to problems with the relationship with that boys father and/or family. I greatly appreciate you sharing the story with all of us. It's stories like that in which people can learn from. And it proves EXACTLY the point I was trying to make (of course, the CityBeat folk won't even hear what you're saying).

Kelly: just mentioning Jims name in your opening paragraph shows how insane you are. He has nothing to do with this topic. Again, you guys at CityBeat have such a hatred for the Reader, Republicans, rich people, and so many others...that logic goes out the window. I mean, you're right. I am the COMMA MANGLER. It's a piece of punctuation I love, yet use poorly. You guys, though, are the COMMon SENSE MANGLERS!

For example, your Homeless Person of the Week pieces you did. They were always interesting to read, but full of crap. I won't even go into all the reasons why, as that's not the topic at hand.

You say that me writing "deserve to die" is so horrible. Well, I found it equally or more horrible, that you would say cops should be held accountable. Accountable, for what?!?!? They pull people over every second of the day, and aren't shooting them. So when they do, my first instinct is to side with them. Mike brings up a VERY GOOD point that I had thought of before. That when they investigate, often times they are found to be justified. But instead of me being a CityBeat editor, and just ASSuming that that's what cops will do to protect their own, I think of all the cases where they didn't do that (Cara Knott on Mercy Road comes to mind...Craig Peyer was the first officer in the U.S. to ever murder someone while on duty, and they are the ones that fleshed out that case).

JoshBoard April 20, 12:20 a.m.

I personally think cops should be allowed to shoot you in the back if you run from them. But guess what? They're not allowed to do that. And I'd also be willing to bet that you think that logic is horrible. But think about someone fleeing from a cop, that runs around a corner and then puts a knife, screw driver..or, shard of glass (weapon? you betcha), to some 5-year-old kids throat as a hostage. It's people like you, Kelly, that make me ashamed that I'm a liberal Democrat.

Regarding the call from San Ysidro...domestic calls are the most dangerous police have to deal with (in all your painstaking research, you surely know this). So when they show up and there's an 87-year-old in a diaper, who gives a crap. It's now a dangerous situation. You can't go by what looks like a threat. Because, I'd be willing to bet nobody would think Phil Spector, Baretta, or OJ were threats. They'd say "You showed up at their house, but these guys are famous. Famous people aren't going to murder their wives." How about we start shooting people and asking questions later? I'd love that.

Do you realize how much restraint the cops had when OJ was in that white Bronco and wouldn't get out of the car when it finally stopped? He was holding a gun, too. But had the police unloaded into that car, all you liberal idiots (Al Sharpton, CityBeat, etc) would be saying the cops did this because he was black. And if that was a white football player he wouldn't have been shot. And talk like that is the worst thing you can do in society. It sets race relations back years. And it makes people fear the cops. You guys probably hate Rush Limbaugh as much as I. But when you write editorials about the big bad police, to me, that's just as bad as anything that Rush has ever said.

Kelly, you mention the cigarette is a "simple request." I think magic answered that well enough. But yeah, I know how those things can escalate. Asking for a cigarette in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest still sticks in my mind.

JoshBoard April 20, 12:23 a.m.

And if you had a family member or friend with Alzheimers, I'm sorry about that. You are correct, I've never had to deal with it. From what I've read, it's a horrible thing to deal with. Yet it still doesn't change anything. If weapons are involved, they need to be put down. For the safety of EVERYONE. You say getting shot in the groin is horrible. I can imagine, I've been hit there a few times in my years playing sports. But cops don't do things like a Bruce Willis movie, where the gun or weapon is shot out of the hand. They are trained to shoot the biggest target. If, as you say, they aren't supposed to use bean bags on old people, why were they cleared of the charges?

You talk about the failure of health care and all that liberal bull crap. Which really has nothing to do with criminals, or insane people, carrying weapons. You sound as idiotic as Michael Moore always does when he distorts facts.

To bring up that I misspelled Louisianna...who really cares. It's a typo. Hell, maybe it's not. But I'm writing a blog; this isn't something submitted to my editors.

And to remind you of the point Mindy brought up...HAD the cops done what I would've preferred -- and what they sometimes do and get in trouble for -- this kid would've been shot the second he held the gun up and wouldn't drop it. Even if he was yelling "shoot me, I want to die." Yes, that's a suicidal person that needs mental help. But so what. We can't risk him pointing at a cop and firing. Or, as this kid did, shooting into a mobile home park (after all, we might accidentally take out one of Kellys relatives).

JoshBoard April 20, 12:29 a.m.

And a few last things, David. It was smart for you to put a link to the CityBeat piece. It'll probably garner you more readers this way than you usually get.

And, I don't really care about putting links. My blog is where I'm just ranting about a topic. If someone wants to post the real story, they're free to do that. I'm not going to spend 8 hours researching a story and reading links before writing a blog.

But I did just glance at your piece again. After reading the first few sentences, about how the police settled with the family for over $300,000 got me so angry, I didn't even care to go farther.

Because, idiots like you feel that our taxpayer money should go to families that harbor dangerous people, once they get shot by the police.

You probably also support those handicapped folks that purposely go to small businesses that don't have the proper ramp, or mirror in the bathroom, and sue and win money. Yet you'll bitch up a storm that we don't do anything for the homeless.

Well, you got Obama in office. So, he should be able to take care of the homeless and all these health care issues that you guys claim the big, bad Republicans screw up. Let's see what he does.

mike1 April 20, 12:34 a.m.

Josh...in all fairness, I was saying the cops get the benefit in the investigation with some suspicion. And the fact is if 99% of cop incidents don't result in shootings and we never likely hear of it, the few that do should be investigated thoroughly and we shouldn't automatically take the cop's side just because they have a hard job to do. And there is a difference between a shard of glass and a gun. Especially from a distance.

magicsfive April 20, 6:55 a.m.

well just for the record when i spoke of the shard of glass i was more concerned about the damage he could have done to himself.

kellydavis April 20, 9:24 a.m.

You're not a liberal Democrat, you moron ("well you got Obama in the office"). And you think that a cop should be allowed to shoot someone in the back who's running from them? Oh my god Josh. That's called manslaughter.

Josh, darling, sweetheart, imbecile: until you read through the documents associated with any of the cases you're opining about keep your mouth closed. Shut. Zip it. Zip. It. But you admittedly remain willfully ignorant.

BTW: the chief of police is holding special training sessions for his officers over the next few months on best practices for situations that might escalate to deadly force (in other words, reserving deadly force for the last possible option). They'd laugh you and your crazy ideas right out of the classroom. Do you think a cop enjoys killing another human being? Obviously you do in your twisted martial-law-gone-mad, mad, mad world.

SpliffAdamz_ April 20, 9:25 a.m.

Josh , were you born stupid or did your parents teach you to kiss everyone's azz and obey authority when you were growing up? I think you side with cops because your too much of a coward to stand up against authority. Get rid of that yellow streak down your back!!!! You think giving someone a gun and some half azz racist training is someone people in society have to respect , your the idiot!!! I'm sorry i trust nobody with a gun , especially an over work , under paid , ex military slave , alcohol abuser , crack head , hide behind my badge cowardly azz cop!!! Cops are good to have in society to help deal with the crazy people in it , but they're not above the law. The sad thing about it is that amerikkka has to give cops the benefit , because if they don't then in reality we really don't need them. We would have to police ourselves and cowards like joshb wouldn't last long in a society like that. So tell me how dose it feel to have breath that smells like shyt from kissing everybody's azz your whole life!!!! You called Al Sharpton a racist? How is Al Sharpton a racist? Al Sharpton didn't bring africans over here to amerikkka to be slaves!!! Al Sharpton didn't write the WILLY LYNCH PAPERS on how to break the african and make a slave!!! Al Sharpton didn't come up with the JIM CROW LAWS ,(which were laws against only africans)!!! Al Sharpton didn't marry into the indians culture , then steal their land and put them on reservations camps!!! Al Sharpton didn't bring phillapinos over here to work on the railroads!!! Before you call some one a racist you need to understand what racism is , who started it and who is really benefiting from it. But you are the typical amerikkkan , you bend over grab your ankles and enjoy every thing the government is pumping in you!!! With pussies like you roaming the planet no wonder why the world is screwed!!!!

kellydavis April 20, 9:29 a.m.

And as for this:

"But think about someone fleeing from a cop, that runs around a corner and then puts a knife, screw driver..or, shard of glass (weapon? you betcha), to some 5-year-old kids throat as a hostage."

Where's that coming from? Did I say that? No. Don't assume, Joshy. The distance you're jumping to conclusions is world-record worthy.

melbamoose April 20, 9:32 a.m.

"You say that me writing "deserve to die" is so horrible. Well, I found it equally or more horrible, that you would say cops should be held accountable. Accountable, for what?!?!?"

This is a really astounding comment. Not only is it incredibly ignorant, it is dangerous. Why in the world would you not want the police to be held accountable? Shouldn't everyone be held accountable for their actions?? Isn't it in the police's best interest to have their officers who do not uphold the law or honor of the force disciplined and, god forbid, held accountable??? Doesn't it bring more respect and trust to the department as a whole to say in won't tolerate people who don't abide by their own rules?

JoshBoard April 20, 10:16 a.m.

mel: yes, I want police held accountable for things they do wrong. What I mean is, there IS NOTHING THEY DID WRONG to be held accountable for. They shot a guy that they pulled over. And, it was INVESTIGATED, as ALL police shootings are. So, it bothers me when papers like CityBeat write that they aren't being held accountable, or that police need better training...yet, they don't say anything about how people in society should do what a cop says when they get pulled over.

In Christopher Dardens book, he says during the riots in L.A. he happened to be driving his brand new Mercedes in a bad part of town, and cops pulled him and his black friends over with guns drawn. He did what they said, and there was no problem. Wow...interesting concept. You follow rules, don't do anything crazy, and you don't get shot. Even if you're black.

Spliff: I have no problem with you calling me an idiot, but once you wrote the word "Amerikkka", you become someone that isn't worth the time.

mike: We don't know that 99% of cop investigations benefit the police. But I would assume the number is rather high. And that isn't because cops are protecting their own. It's probably because...as sad as it is if a cop shoots someone with a water bottle, or a child that was holding a toy gun that they told to drop and the kid didn't...the fact is, the cop would THEN be justified in firing. If it's a dark house and he can't tell it's a kid, he just sees the "weapon" and he fires, why would that not be justified?

Kelly: you can call it manslaughter, but I'd rather have cops out committing "manslaughter" then letting someone run from the law and committ more crimes. If you ever watch a show like Cops or anything like that, you'll see officers will have their guns drawn, and the criminals are still yelling and carrying on, often with something in their hand. And they aren't shot. And it amazes me the cops have that much restraint. Yet, the few cases that come along that turn out different, all the idiot liberals jump on them.

JoshBoard April 20, 10:19 a.m.

Do I think cops try to get away with things when they shoot someone? Abso-friggin-lutely. Why wouldn't they? But, they aren't shooting someone gleefully, and then happily trying to get away with it. They shoot someone, that was probably doing a lot wrong. And, they want to make sure the investigation into it goes their way.

A perfect example is the OJ Simpson case. We can all agree that Mark Fuhrman was a racist scum bag. But Phil VanAdder (sp?) and the other cop, did nothing wrong. Well, apparently they did. They jumped OJs gate and searched the place before they had a warrant. And, I believe they LIED (in court), and said they feared OJ could be dead inside, so they immediately wanted to get onto the crime scene.

Should these good cops lose their job for something like that?

This, Spliff, is why I support the cops. Not because I'm an ass kisser, but because the idiots of the world have made so many laws that protect criminals, and screw over society (and police).

And Kelly, I am a Democrat. I voted for Obama. I'm just a liberal Democrat that has a brain, and realizes that people have the right to own fire arms. I'm willing to listen when people talk that think differently. And I'm able to see that a person like Michael Moore is no different than Rush Limbaugh. Both lie and say what they want, spouting them off as fact. Just because I agree politically with Moore about 75% of the time, and about 10% of the time with Rush, to me, they are equally idiotic.

DavidRolland April 20, 10:24 a.m.

It's kind of entertaining to watch this blogger spin and flail wildly. Al Sharpton, OJ, healthcare, homelessness, Obama, Republicans? Slow down, there, li'l fella, you're liable to hurt yourself. We published a moderated editorial that simply expressed a desire for police policies to be reviewed when a citizen dies unnecessarily, and it's got you in quite a lather.

It seems to me that you have a tough time identifying moderation, complexity, nuance and subtlety. I'm guessing that in your personal relationships, people have expressed concern about your excessive use of the words "always" and "never." Am I right? And do you have a hard time admitting you were wrong? C'mon, be honest. Do your eyes have trouble discerning shades of gray?

If you think CityBeat hates Republicans and is prone to conspiracy theories, it just shows that you either haven't been reading the editorials or you just aren't understanding them. Do we criticize some Republican ideology? Of course; we're liberals. But we've also expressed concern about the possibility that the Democrat-dominated City Council won't be able to stand up to the employee unions. We've also said that while we have trouble with many of Republican Mayor Sanders' policies, we nonetheless think extremely highly of him as a person and believe him to be genuine and honest. Meanwhile, we've gored Democratic City Council president Ben Hueso on several occasions. Do you even know who these people are? Have you really even read CityBeat's editorials, or did you just stumble upon one and then generalize recklessly?

You've also gone a bit loony on race. Who said anything about race? You kind of created that one in your mixed-up little head, my boy.

One last thing: I don't really care if you do research or not before doing your brain purges into your blog, but if you want it to have any long-term viability with a significant number of readers, you ought to consider it. Just a tip. I love reading well-considered arguments against our opinions; it helps me hone my thinking and become ever more nuanced. I'm just sorry that it looks like I can't count on you for that.

JoshBoard April 20, 10:27 a.m.

Surfp: I was going to go back and read all these replies, but it just seemed a bit daunting. I did read yours, which was the second one. And you mention that police need proper training on dealing with the elderly and kids. Well, society doesn't really work that way. I've said for years (even contacted the cops and told them a good plan), that officers need better people skills. Often times, they make a situation worse with their attitudes.

But, they are trained on dealing with people that have weapons. You can't say "Now, if it's an old guy, that's just standing in his yard spouting off because he hates the new taxes the President has implimented....you can throw all your training out the window on how to apprehend him. He's old." or "If it's a kid holding a toy gun, don't shoot him." I'm sure everyone agrees on that. But if you can't tell it's a kid, what do you do? Or, what happens if it's a Columbine situation. Those were kids, and they were shooting.

What if a cop saw that Asian guy with a guy, walking to Virginia Tech. I'd like to think if he said "Drop the weapon" and the guy didn't, he'd be shot dead (which we know would've saved lives), instead of the cop thinking "This is some college student, or kid. He's probably just playing a joke on someone, so I won't shoot."

Yes, of course it's sad when things happen like the story a few Halloweens back, where a black actor was dressed at a party on Halloween, and pointed a fake gun at a cop that showed up because of noise complaints. Well, that decisions ends up with that actor dead. And I sound like that jerk for typing that I don't have sympathy, whereas...yes surf, I'd like to say "Cops should know, that on Halloween, lots of people are wearing costumes and have fake guns." But just think about that, and how disasterous it would be to change instruction based on a holiday. Sure, banks have signs on Halloween that say no masks allowed. But, if you go down that route, then toy guns are banned (not that I'm against that), or anything remotely shaped like one. It basically comes down to society needing to use common sense when dealing with cops, and they'll be fine.

And, this is all coming from a guy that had a cop lie, in court, about a traffic stop with me. Yet I still support the cops, because they put their life on the line, for not a lot of pay, and when they are involved in a justified shooting -- or one that isn't justified -- the get the crap end of the stick.

canongrl April 20, 10:31 a.m.

Josh, is a racist and a bigot who has taken his diatribe directly to the staff at CityBeat. Below is the text of an email he wrote to me this morning (after sending me emails earlier this month telling me that he was a fan of my column and that I'm a great addition; during a brief string of communication, he took it upon himself to look at some of my photos and then complimented my "cute kid" who happens to be black). Here, he is responding to my suggestion that he try learning something by reading "Why Are All The Black Kids Sitting In The Cafeteria" by Beverly Daniel Tatum. Take it away, Josh:

"You should try finding (or writing) a book about why black kids sit in cars, with their stereos blasting, as if they think everyone else wants to hear 50 Cent.

Or, why they sit in movie theatres making noise, talking on cell phones or at the screen, as if they are Chris Rock.

I'm sure you'll get to deal with all that fun, when your little one grows up.

(read Freakanomics, they talk about how adopted kids are never as smart...because they get the intelligence from the folks that gave them up).

So, good luck with that.

Geez, now that I think about it, it's probably good you couldn't have kids. It's one less idiot that has your genes in this world.

J"

It will be interesting to see whether The Reader lets this comment stand or whether it gets censored. Does The Reader really stand by one of their writers who is willing to go on record to say that my black daughter is going to be a menace to society because she's black and adopted?

~Aaryn Belfer

JoshBoard April 20, 10:39 a.m.

David, here's your post. I'll respond in ALL CAPS:

It's kind of entertaining to watch this blogger spin and flail wildly.

I TYPE 120 WORDS A MINUTE. ME WRITING A LOT ISN'T SPINNING AND FLAILING. IT'S RESPONDING TO POSTS.

Al Sharpton, OJ, healthcare, homelessness, Obama, Republicans? Slow down, there, li'l fella, you're liable to hurt yourself. We published a moderated editorial that simply expressed a desire for police policies to be reviewed when a citizen dies unnecessarily, and it's got you in quite a lather.

DO YOU REALIZE HOW IDIOTIC THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH IS? YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU GUYS JUST "EXPRESSED A DESIRE FOR POLICE POLICIES TO BE REVIEWED WHEN A CITIZEN DIES UNNECESSARY." JUST THE FACT THAT YOU USED THE WORD "UNNECESSARY" SHOWS YOUR BIAS. AND WHAT IN THE HELL MAKES YOU THINK THAT THE POLICE DON'T REVIEW THESE POLICIES? I'D BET MONEY THEY DO IT ALL THE TIME. THEY AREN'T JUST SITTING IN SOME POLICE STATION GOING "OH WELL, ANOTHER PERSON SHOT DEAD. LET'S GO GRAB COFFEE AND DONUTS AND NOT REVIEW ANYTHING."

It seems to me that you have a tough time identifying moderation, complexity, nuance and subtlety. I'm guessing that in your personal relationships, people have expressed concern about your excessive use of the words "always" and "never." Am I right? And do you have a hard time admitting you were wrong? C'mon, be honest. Do your eyes have trouble discerning shades of gray?

ACTUALLY, TO ANSWER THE ABOVE QUESTION, MY FRIENDS LOVE DEBATING WITH ME ON TOPICS, BECAUSE I'LL ADMIT WHEN I'M WRONG. I REMEMBER A FRIEND OF MINE THAT IS A PROFESSOR AT BERKLEY. HE AND I BOTH AGREED WOMEN DON'T MAKE THE SAME MONEY MEN MAKE, AND WHEN I ARGUED THIS WITH ANOTHER FRIEND, HE QUICKLY EXPLAINED HOW THAT ISN'T THE CASE. AND WITHIN 30 MINUTES, I HAD SIDED WITH HIM.

JoshBoard April 20, 10:40 a.m.

continued:

If you think CityBeat hates Republicans and is prone to conspiracy theories, it just shows that you either haven't been reading the editorials or you just aren't understanding them. Do we criticize some Republican ideology? Of course; we're liberals. But we've also expressed concern about the possibility that the Democrat-dominated City Council won't be able to stand up to the employee unions. We've also said that while we have trouble with many of Republican Mayor Sanders' policies, we nonetheless think extremely highly of him as a person and believe him to be genuine and honest. Meanwhile, we've gored Democratic City Council president Ben Hueso on several occasions. Do you even know who these people are? Have you really even read CityBeat's editorials, or did you just stumble upon one and then generalize recklessly?

I WILL ADMIT, ON THE ABOVE, YOU GOT ME. I'VE SEEN EDITIORIALS WHERE YOU DO THAT. I JUST DON'T THINK YOU DO IT ENOUGH, AS THE DEMOCRATS SURELY DO MORE THAT DESERVES TO BE KNOCKED.

You've also gone a bit loony on race. Who said anything about race? You kind of created that one in your mixed-up little head, my boy.

THE RACE THING I BRING UP FOR A FEW REASONS: PREVIOUS BLOGS HAVE BEEN ON THAT. ALSO, IT USUALLY ENDS UP BEING A WHITE OFFICER SHOOTING A BLACK SUSPECT, THAT GETS PEOPLE RILED UP. AND, RACE WAS IN FACT BROUGHT UP, IN THE CASE IN LOUISIANNA, WHERE THE OLD BLACK MAN WAS SHOT BY A WHITE OFFICER.

One last thing: I don't really care if you do research or not before doing your brain purges into your blog, but if you want it to have any long-term viability with a significant number of readers, you ought to consider it. Just a tip. I love reading well-considered arguments against our opinions; it helps me hone my thinking and become ever more nuanced. I'm just sorry that it looks like I can't count on you for that.

STRONG ENDING. BUT NOT A STRONG POINT. AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY, I'VE CHANGED MY MIND ON DEBATES WHEN PEOPLE BRING THE FACTS THAT I WAS TOO LAZY TO FLESH OUT; OR BECAUSE I JUST GOT THE INITIAL STORY WRONG.

JoshBoard April 20, 10:46 a.m.

Aaryn...I do think you write a great column.

But, when you logged onto the Reader website a while back and didn't own up to the fact that you were a CityBeat writer, as you attacked my blog and other aspects of the Reader, that was lame.

You guys do the same thing on YELP and other sites (I know this, because one of your employees confided in me that they were paid to do this).

You recommended a book to me, and some writing courses.

So I sent you an email recommending the book Freakanomics, which talks a lot about the problems people have with adopted kids. And they talk about the misbelief that blacks are in prison merely because of crack cocaine.

When you read that book, I'll read the one you recommend

(your kid is cute...and I hope doesn't become a menace to society; i'm sure if the child does, it will be the cops fault for profiling)

JoshBoard April 20, 10:49 a.m.

One last thing Aaryn...it's funny that you don't prefer me to send a PERSONAL EMAIL with an attack on CityBeat staff, yet I've read at least 25 times, in the last 5 years, personal attacks on the publisher of the Reader.

And those aren't emails to my boss. They are things written in CityBeat, for all (132 people that pick it up) to read.

canongrl April 20, 11 a.m.

Get out your library card and your dictionary so you can start making your way through Tatum's book because I read Freakanomics in 2006. And it didn't talk "a lot" about adoption. There was some mention of it but there's plenty of literature to counter what the author wrote. You can find some of it at www.adoptioninstitute.org, if you're truly interested in learning something about which you "rant." You seem to agree that adopted children are "never as smart" as children raised by their biological parents. So, then. What's the reason you're so intellectually stunted?

Finally, I did debate you on a previous blog post titled "Sexting" without using my real name, because someone else is already registered on this site with it. I stand proudly behind every single comment on that string, but I didn't need to identify myself as a CityBeat columnist because it had nothing to do with CityBeat. To my credit, when you sent me the bit of fan mail (which is, by the minute, seeming ever more disingenuous), I didn't pretend to be anyone other than the person who eviscerated you.

~aaryn

NachoDaddy April 20, 11:02 a.m.

Cops seem most active and enthusiastic when they're harassing and collecting revenue, not protecting and serving. Sorry, but from what I see, they have their priorities in reverse. Trying to fine the average man en masse to compensate for the state government's lack of ability. Also, I'm deaf to journalist that want to be the cop's buddy after a ride along. Why? Cause every journalist writes the same article after a ride along. Now, if the police did their job with a sense of priority, and not the sense of laziness of your typical civil servant, I might come around.

Kelly: You wrote a great rebuttal, and then you drove off of Tantrum Cliff. I can see why you wrote what you wrote, but seeing that you are the editor at CityBeat, I think you have some responsibility to ... not necessarily be civil, but not to go so far. Your response was thorough, so it didn't take away from it. It was just unfortunate.

Josh, I can see where the commenter noted that you were flailing. "Well, what if..." I hate those exaggerations in arguements. I'm referring the the screwdriver-around-the-corner bit.

You're right about their people skills. A lot of the time, their concerned more about power and control than solutions. In my opinion, people that want to help people do not become cops. They become firemen and nurses. People that want power and control (and I have spoken to a few) become cops.

I get that they put their lives on the line. I also know that in those domestic calls, even if it was the man that called the police to safely remedy the situation, the hero-wanna-bes almost always sides with the woman. A friend of mine called the cops. He was the only one with injury caused by her. He still had to leave his own house.

Citybeat -- Josh, CityBeat is a welcome breath of fresh air to the Eight Million Word Dry Fact Vomitorium that is the Reader main article. If it wasn't for the Reader's columns, I would not pick it up. (I do prefer Josh's Eight Million Words more than the others. So far, nothing has beaten his article on good sportsmanship. insertobsessedlinkhere)

Kelly -- it's great that you, being the editor, have instant access to all the background material involving the case. It's great that you shared it with us. I say, like you or not, that has made this string one of the most interesting I have ever seen. But, people should not have to have a Ph.D in a topic to discuss it. As long as they are mature enough to listen to the other side, and take in new information, that is what discourse is about.

In closing, if I missed something, read something wrong, didn't research the above thoroughly enough, well... it's a crap load of stuff, and I have to get back to work. I haven't even read the CityBeat article in question. (It's in my inbox, Kelly. I swear!)

DavidRolland April 20, 11:07 a.m.

Hey Josh, I'd like to give you a chance to take this reckless comment back:

"You guys do the same thing on YELP and other sites (I know this, because one of your employees confided in me that they were paid to do this)."

This is flat-out false and possible grounds for legal action.

kellydavis April 20, 11:16 a.m.

Josh, we're critical of your boss' persistent war against a woman's right to decide what happens to her body. We've also opined that the website he publishes (from the Reader's offices), www.calcatholic.com, is a vehicle for hate speech against gays and lesbians.

As far as Yelp, Kinsee Morlan freelanced for them years ago, for about six months total, when she was a part-time staffer for us. Yelp was just getting started and was hiring people to produce content. She posted a critical review of The Reader under "kinseem" and included her photo. She never tried to hide her identity. She didn't secretly tell you this information——we knew what she was doing and we made sure there was no conflict with her job at CityBeat.

And, finally, attacking someone's 3-year-old kid because she's black and adopted, and using phrases like "I hope she doesn't become a menace to society"——wow. You're a class act, dude.

melbamoose April 20, 11:32 a.m.

Josh, you should listen to the raw video footage of Mike Marrinan here: http://www.10news.com/investigations/18148397/detail.html

NachoDaddy April 20, 11:51 a.m.

Crap, Josh. I had this defense all written out, and then caught the "menace to society" remark. While I do not feel that you are a bigot, and while I feel that people who are willing to launch that attack on their Facebook are only doing so out of retaliation, I think you have your inner-Archie Bunker on which to work.

There is discussing issues, and there's letting your frustrations with not being able to vocalize them. The blasting of stereos and not knowing how to act in theaters: in the last ten years, I have to say these know no color. Selfish, indifferent displays of cheap power is epidemic.

Is it wrong or bigoted to discuss statistics? Sure, stats can be manipulated. Does pointing out negative tendencies in the black community make you a racist? I think, as long as things like perception and self-worth weigh in heavily on a person's success in life, then discussing these topics should be considered.

kellydavis April 20, 12:15 p.m.

Hi Nacho: I'm not the editor. David Rolland's the editor. And just as JB took it upon himself to attack CityBeat on his blog, we can counterattack in any and every form we choose (written, of course).

In the case of Mr. Zavala, all that info's publicly available from the county medical examiner. Josh, being a (ahem) member of the media, has as much access to information as I do.

canongrl April 20, 12:29 p.m.

For the record, the menace to society line was mine. Josh didn't say it. Well, he did say it, but not using those exact words.

My point in posting his email here is to show the kinds of inflammatory statements that are too often given a pass in our society. It's not as if Josh is the only person who holds these narrow, ignorant views. It's the some-of-my-best-friends-are-black defense of people who understand that being openly bigoted is unaccepted by most of society.

Josh is a racist. Period. (He also suffers from ageism and adoptism, among what I'm sure is a plethora of other -isms.) That aside, as a fellow writer (barely) with a bone to pick, Josh can rip on me all he wants; I have no problem with that. But using my kid to prove his point is despicable. And ultimately, lashing out at her only highlights the racist underpinning of his entire argument.

JoshBoard April 20, 1:52 p.m.

Well, to respond to canon first...I enjoyed your column on the Octomom. I enjoy most of your columns, as I told you. But like the Octomom, you are exploiting your kid by putting pictures of him on your website. Why do that? What's the point of it?

And, when someone attacks me personally, or my boss, I'll respond any damn way I want, no matter what it sounds like. You've gone on and on about me learning how to write and taking classes. So, I'll tell you to take some parenting classes. Because, you're probably going to raise your kid to fear the police, or disobey them. And in the long run, it could cause some serious harm for him to grow up thinking "the man" is out to get him. And that's truely what is sad. Not some comments that I may have said to get under your skin in a personal email.

I love the fact that people adopt children. Why would I be against that? I just adopted a dog from the shelter. It's great giving kids (or animals) a nice home.

Nacho: the biggest misconception is people thinking they know WHY people become cops. Everyone thinks it's guys that have a chip on their shoulder, or they want to bully people. The simple fact is, there are LOTS of reasons why people become cops. Just like the many firemen I've played basketball with (for some reason, lots of firefighters show up at the gym for hoops). Often times, they've chosen that profession just because. They aren't even sure why. Some finished military service, and felt like that was one of the only options available to them.

Most cops I've met have been jerks. Maybe it's because I ran a red light, or was speeding. But when people think it's because of race, or because they just want to cover up their crimes, I have a problem with that and I'll defend those cops.

David: for a magazine that seems to pride itself on its extensive and thorough research and obsession with my spelling of states, you need to consult a lawyer. Nothing I said is grounds for legal action (wow, now it sounds like you're the one flailing).

Kelly: You saying I'm a class act for attacking something of a personal nature...you still haven't explained why the Reader gets brought up in your attacks (side note: I like to mangle the ellipsis as much as I do the comma). If Jim works on a Catholic publication, why not attack that and leave the Reader name out? Oh wait, I think I know the answer. You're under the misguided belief that all of our advertisers will read it, freak out, and stop buying ads; since they'd surely be appauld by his stance on something like, say, Prop 8. Although, I'm assuming the majority felt like him on the issue, as we saw how that went (much to my dismay, as I feel any two people should have the right to marry).

cardig April 20, 2:15 p.m.

I agree with what J says "in the blog". If you don't do as the cops say when in the moment of being questioned or arrested, then you get what you deserve. If you have a problem, make a complaint after the fact, or hire one of the thousands of lawyers in the county and sue.

Since the blogger here called out Citybeat, I guess you are getting what you wanted in a flame war.

I have never heard of CityBeat, guess I live in a cave or something. Based on the amount of ranting and raving on this blog by those employed there, I am guessing you all have too much time on your hands and nothing better to write about for your own publication.

This was a gem I had to comment on, and one of the few comments germain to the blog....Kelly wrote...(Mr. Zavala was given less than 17 minutes to comply) WOW!!! REALLY!!!

How long should a cop stand there requesting you drop a weapon??? That is utter BS!! I say ask 3 times max., if you don't drop the weapon, then the cops should use any force necessary to MAKE you comply!!

DavidRolland April 20, 2:28 p.m.

Josh, it's time for you to clarify what you meant when you said: "You guys do the same thing on YELP and other sites (I know this, because one of your employees confided in me that they were paid to do this)."

That statement implies that CityBeat pays its employees to write deceptive comments on online sites. Is that what you meant to say?

If so, you are either deliberately trying to damage CityBeat's reputation by knowingly spreading false and defamatory information, or you misunderstood something you were told.

If that's not what you meant, you need to clarify it so your readers don't misunderstand you.

kellydavis April 20, 2:40 p.m.

What does "appauld" mean?

My explanation was very clear. Jim Holman, the owner of the Reader, made a considerable amount of money from the folks who advertise in his publication. He's chosen to use that money to try to chip away at a woman's right to choose, to undermine the civil rights of gays and lesbians and to publish conservative religious rants on the website that's funded by Reader profits. I'm sure he's a nice guy and all that, but it's my publication's right to criticize him, just likes it's your right to express your opinion on cops and such. And it's my right to argue back. And so on and so forth. The same constitutional rights that protect your rants also protect people from things like being shot in the back by a cop.

JoshBoard April 20, 6 p.m.

Sorry. In my mind I combined applaud and appalled, but you knew what I meant.

card: I actually didn't want a war with CityBeat. I just get furious reading all these negative things about cops or anyone that isn't sympathetic to their causes, in their paper. I just read in the Union-Tribune this morning, that a 19 and 16-year old were arrested in Escondido. They were pulled over by a cop and shot him in the face with a pellet gun.

Will we see a story from CityBeat on this? Nope. Because the officer showed restraint, made the arrest, without firing his weapon. But that doesn't go with what they're all about. They'll look for the story where a cop makes a mistake.

Or, had the cops shot and killed these kids and it turned out they were great students, CityBeat would be asking that police review the policies on shooting teenagers or something. It just gets tiring. But my bigger fear is that idiot slacker types will read crap like that and think that's the way the world is. It's why so many ding bats think 9/11 was a conspiracy by the Bush administration (a view I would almost bet most CityBeat writers shares).

As for saying CityBeat has too much time on their hands, that's hardly a fair statement. They're responding to what I wrote about their paper. Nothing wrong with that. It's what I do when a friend of mine informs me some website somewhere is knocking the Reader.

Which leads me to answering (sort of), Davids request.

At this time I don't wish to explain what I meant regarding websites and the negative things posted about the Reader. Everyone that reads these posts, will realize a couple things because of me being vague on the subject. First, that you guys are thorough in your research when writing stories for your publication. As long as they fit your liberal leaning stance on the issues. But, when it comes to negative things written about the Reader on various websites, they will now wonder who it is posting that. And they have to consider that it might be coming from the competition (for lack of a better word)

NachoDaddy April 20, 7:25 p.m.

Aaryn, thanks to owning up to the actual quote of "menace to society." Josh, sorry about that. Didn't realize it was her leap.

Kelly -- yes, you can. I never said you "could not." (Starting to see a pattern.)

I have to say that, in all of the main players here, I am seeing too much, "Well, if you said such'n such, then you must mean such'n such." Too much putting words into other people's mouth to highlight a point.

Still, this has been great on all sides, and I do not mean the dramatic aspect.

I think it is all right for media to fall at different points on the political spectrum. What I want is for, like CityBeat, to own up to it. Don't write for the far right or the far left, and pretend that you are Everyman. I think that we, as individuals, grow from reading items, and thinking about how much or little we agree with them and why. It's the difference between knowing something intuitively and really understanding it.

Aaryn, I just want to say that you won me over at a time where I would only open to Sordid Tales, read and close again.

drewfromthepast April 20, 8:37 p.m.

I've been beaten up by the San Diego police while co-operating with them during questioning (over something I was not guilty of). When I filed a complaint (as you suggested in your article)they came to my house a week later, drug me out of my driveway and kicked my ass again in front of my mother. I'm sure you'll assume I was doing something wrong, but that would be a completely ignorant assumption. I am a white professional businessman, who learned to distrust the police at a very early age. I am 40 years old now, and a productive upright citizen, with a spotless criminal record. And I hate the police with a ferver. I am not a "loser" as you assume everyone who encounters a cop is. But in every limited encounter I've had with the police, they've gone out of their way to be complete a**holes. I'm sure there are good cops, but at best, I consider them a necessary evil. And when a white, suburban, "suit" thinks that way, you can be damn sure that our police have an image problem that needs correcting, for their own safety, as well as that of the people they've sworn to protect.

melbamoose April 20, 10:20 p.m.

You are VERY lucky, Josh, that the cop that lied in court about you was lying about something minor. You're lucky you walked away from that traffic ticket/stop(?) alive. I would hope and assume that your family would demand accountability and not just take the cop's lies at face value if you were battered or killed. Even if you are an ass.

JoshBoard April 21, 12:17 a.m.

Oh mel...you're the ass. Probably another CityBeat staffer, doing what they all seem to do. Go onto websites, knock the Reader, and don't own up to who they are (although, this is one website that isn't paying you for your post; so, we appreciate your participation for free. I understand it's probably not the norm).

Nacho, that's a very good point. One of the things I hate most about Bill O'Reilly, is that he tries to play this "I'm middle of the road. I'm fair and balanced. I just don't like spin. I'm not a Republican." And, guess what? I'll bet CityBeat hates that (and him), too. Yet they don't own up to what they're all about.

A CityBeat writer just sent me an email, that they have a link about me being a racist, or that the Reader supports racism. It's typical of what they do. They won't post that they support cop killing, or disrespect of authority.

How can I be racist? My 9th, 17th, and 23rd best friends right now are black (that 9th just barely cracked the top 10!)

drew: there are too many holes (or incomplete facts) for me to believe your story is true. Sorry, I just can't. Unless you can give more details. But I doubt you can, or will.

When a report is filed, the idea that they'd come over and beat you up a week later, sorry. It doesn't pass the smell test.

A few African-Americans I play basketball with...others that I worked with, always tried to play this card with me. And, their stories never checked out. They'd admit to lying and making things up. Or, they'd fail to leave out that the car hadn't been registered in 5 years and that's why the cop was hassling him (not because of his color, as he initially told a group of us).

Come on everyone, let's cheer up. My current blog is on candy bars. Yummy!

rickeysays April 21, 12:34 a.m.

What all the liberal idiots need to realize is the cops do not get paid to kiss your ass, or even to be nice to you. They get paid to deal with the worst elements of society, so the rest of us don't have to. So if you give them an attitude when you have an encounter with them, they're probably not going to treat you very well. Drew, for instance. But this is why they deserve the benefit of the doubt. Because of the job they do, and the type of people they deal with every day. If you can't see the truth of this, then you probably are one of the people I'm talking about.

lallaw April 21, 2:45 a.m.

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely." That is the fear for many people looking down the business end of a county or state issued firearm poised at arm's length from a badge, or they see the red and blue lights flash on like lightening in their rear view mirrors. For the most part, I would agree in spirit with JoshB that basically if you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, that is not always the case and I think that is what has the other side of this controversy respective shorts' in a twist.

Josh I have to say that police officers are not like you and me, nor can or should they be held to your "basic Joe human" standard. They are in a position of special trust. The vast majority of the time they are heroes, peace keepers, peace makers. Just as often the heroic things they do go unnoticed or not recognized or thanked. They have saved far more lives than they have ever taken, wrongly or otherwise. And I for one have been glad, with hands clasped as if in prayer, when I have needed help and there they came. God Bless them and their families. Talk about a thankless job...

But they are also held to public scrutiny for a very good reason. Much like the poem my Mother used to tell me was written about me (long story) which I loosely repeat: when they are good they are very very good; but, when they are bad they are horrid. Someone who I know with the force for most of his life told me once that most police officers walk a fine line between being a "law man" and being a criminal themselves. The "blue" do cover up for each other. Some make innocent mistakes which I can assure you in my years working with them haunt them far more than it haunts the public memory. But these are not the guys City Beat or some of your other posters here Josh were talking about.

Some cops are just plain bad cops. Some are even bad people. They should never have become cops in the first place. I call these types "cops" not "police officers." I hate to offer an opinion when I don't personally know all the facts or know for myself that the facts another professes are, in fact, true. But if Kelly Davis is 100% accurate in the facts she relayed, then those police officers HAVE been trained to handle that situation differently than how it apparently was handled. They did not follow policy and procedure. And Josh they can still be "cleared" of manslaughter or use of excessive force, but fail to follow policy and procedure which leads to a bad result, i.e., they kill someone. Once cleared of criminal conduct by the D.A., it then becomes an internal police matter and they can be written up or reprimanded or even discharged. That is confidential and won't be publicized with rare exception. So being cleared criminally does not necessarily mean "they didn't do anything wrong." (to be continued)...

lallaw April 21, 2:49 a.m.

(continued from above)...

Now I wasn't there, so I do not know how menacing this guy was or if he truly did present a danger to himself or others. He may very well have. I would ask City Beat to either publish or scan all the documents Ms. Davis speaks of (or request them under a FOIA request and make them available) so that we can all read for ourselves what the paperwork seems to say about it. Was an autopsy performed? Has a coroner’s report been issued? Would like to read those too.

I don't think police officers need to unnecessarily put themselves at risk, but because of they voluntarily put themselves into this position of special care and trust for and by the public, yes they DO have to take longer than 17 minutes to talk an obviously unstable individual down, or use the least restrictive least deadly means possible to secure the situation (required police procedure, by the way) and sometimes the very nature of their job means that when dealing with minors or the handicapped or the mentally ill they are supposed to assume additional risk to protect that person who cannot protect themselves. Even when that person is the problem. Crazy, huh? But that is the law; that is what they are taught. They are put in a place above the ordinary citizen and that means they have to act like it at all times. Even when they are driving down the road and some woman cuts them off and engages in road rage. They can't just follow her down the off ramp into a public parking area and empty a clip into the cab of her truck or SUV, with her 8 year old son sitting next to her, through the windshield. Don't care WHAT she did wrong. She wasn't armed. She wasn't driving the vehicle toward the guy. She did not pose an "imminent threat or danger." Look how long it took them to place that off duty officer under arrest, and how much time they spent bashing the woman he shot instead (drunk, bad mom, blah blah). If it had been you or me we'd have been on the ground, face first, in a Da Vinci spread with a dark blue knee in our back. Stories like this don't do the force any favors.

They are not human. They are super-human. We created the job and they accepted it. Don't like it, then don't become a cop! Ever since the Rodney King video aired people have openly voiced their mistrust of police officers gone wild. That doesn't mean those people are wrong to mistrust police officers. It means there has been a breach of trust for some pretty valid reasons, and it is up to the breaching party to make amends. (con't...)

lallaw April 21, 2:50 a.m.

Lastly, I have nothing but respect for police officers. My trust of them used to be blindly given. But working in the legal field I saw things first hand that made me realize that one still needs to be wary. Because you just never know if you are being stopped by a good man or woman with a badge and a brain, or somebody who thinks they are above the law because they are the law. Or worse yet, Rambo in Blue. There is little to NOTHING worse than to be wrongly accused or beaten and incarcerated, entirely denied your rights and freedom by someone who has been given the absolute authority to do so. At that point, your constitutional rights aren't worth the paper they are printed on. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. It can and does happen, and while we should all give police officers our full respect and total cooperation at all times. That does not mean we must also give them our complete trust. That must be earned, one traffic stop at a time.

And as an aside, while I tend to lean more toward the point of view toward the City Beat posters here...not entirely as extreme but generally would agree with their research, point of view, and message, I wholeheartedly disagree with the delivery of their message. As provoked, prodded, insulted, and demonized as Josh was he never once reduced his argument to a sputtering of insults as mainly Ms. Davis, and some others, did. You lost the argument when you lost your temper and dignity in that regard. You were coming from a lofty position: outrage against what appears to be an abuse of power which ended the life of someone who clearly needed help. But you flushed it right down the toilet with your cries of "idiot" and "ass" and "moron"...you did everything but question Josh's paternity. Really, a ridiculous way to fight for what amounts to your defense of basic human rights. It causes one to look even more critically at you and your argument for flaws, not support. I happened to notice that while you blasted JoshB for his going "off topic" (I thought blogs like this were supposed to do that stream of consciousness thing)...you drop topics like the CEO of the Reader's stance on abortion rights, etc. Only further diminishes your message...and I was so hoping for as pure and intelligent a message about this topic from you as this topic deserves (and as you point out was missed by this topic's blogger).

melbamoose April 21, 9:14 a.m.

no, Josh, I don't write for CityBEAT. It is possible other people disagree with your way off-base views. It's unfortunate you don't care to research your stories you are talking about. Because I know the details of the Jacob Faust killing, I know how clueless you are.

JoshBoard April 21, 10:06 a.m.

Instead of saying you "know the details" mel, why not POST the details?

lallaw, you bring up good points, as always. It's funny that the CityBeat people don't mind if THEY lose their tempers, but cops are never supposed to lose THEIR tempers!

And, you bring up another point I'd like to address. When that cop in Oceanside (I believe that's where it was), shot that woman and the 8-year-old kid next to her, I went on and on and on, about how wrong that cop was. I didn't even NEED to wait for all the results (ie the woman being on drugs/drunk, or whatever it was). Because, I could tell from the initially story, that it was a case of road rage. And that, the off-duty officer DID NOT feel his life was threatened, when he unloaded into a car. If her car was coming right towards him, and he was outside, he could've clearly gotten out of the way. At most, his car would be getting dented, not his knee cap.

And, it wouldn't have been hard for them (him calling other officers) to track the car down and arrest her on ALL the charges he claims happened with her. She would be arrested, charged, and probably lose her kid.

Instead, that cop is left trying to make up a story to have it favor him the best he can. And, he really shouldn't be an officer anymore.

So, I'm not always "pro officer"...the way CityBeat is ALWAYS anti-police.

JoshBoard April 21, 10:21 a.m.

Since people always think it's extreme when I say "cops should be allowed to shoot you in the back if you try to flee from them," I'll give you an example of WHY I always say this, in todays newspaper.

A man in Vista killed a driver in another vehicle, because he was fleeing from police, got up to speeds of 100 mph. He was drunk. He initially pulled over. When the officer asked for his licesne, he took off.

NOW, had the cop just shot the guy, this other, innocent 23 year old musician, wouldn't be dead.

But, the hardcore liberals will say "Well...maybe the police just shouldn't chase people." I've heard them say that, and it's really the most ridiculous thing to say. That will just get MORE people fleeing from the cops, knowing that once they hit 100 mph, the cops will "back off" for the "safety" of everyone else.

heathergatt April 21, 10:36 a.m.

Honestly, Josh, I don't work at City Beat, don't even live in California but this piece stinks all the way to the city OF Seattle. And Seattle has some awesome police officers.

What I find more disturbing than your RACISTS COMMENTS IN ALL CAPS is that you brought Aaryn's daughter into this nasty mix. Dogging on kids should remain a mandatory no-no Don't you, Josh, feel a little skeeejy pulling the kid "only as smart" card.

You are quite a piece of work. A ONE MAN MORONOTHON!

Does the Reader pay you for this? Is this a paid gig?

magicsfive April 21, 10:56 a.m.

Wait - where IS Fred, anyway?

melbamoose April 21, 11:14 a.m.

Suddenly you're interested in details? By your own admission, you feel secure with knee-jerk reactions and will consider changing your mind only when other people do the work of finding out the facts. The facts have been discovered in the Jacob Faust case. They were found out in the only way possible, by suing.

Only when forced to, the records that the police kept, of evidence, witness statements, police statements, etc. were released to the family. That is when Officer Holiday and Stephen's statements were not corroborated by the 14 witnesses let alone each other's. Jake was unarmed. No evidence of any weapon, fake or real, were ever linked to Jake and his car. He was pulled over for a left-hand turn against a posted sign and was shot and killed less than 30 minutes later. He was seated in the driver's seat unarmed. He didn't put up a fight and non-lethal force was never used. Those are pretty important facts; not what the police initially said to the press who instantly painted Jake to be a loser who deserved it.

If the cops did as they said and followed the law, the city wouldn't have paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars to the family.

lallaw April 21, 3:03 p.m.

Heathergatt: Technically Josh did not bring Aaryn's child "..into this nasty mix," Aaryn did. She published a portion of what was a personal email between herself and Josh, indicating Josh wrote it, in an earlier post on this blog. Regardless of what I might think of the content (and I am one of those people who don't just believe anything anyone says someone else wrote or said without a little more to back it up), but let's say what she published was absolutely what Josh wrote without question. What was the point of publishing the private content of that email?

His blog had nothing to do with African Americans, children, or anything relevant to Aaryn's posting. It was published to embarrass him. Period. Why? Because she doesn't agree with what he was saying about City Beat or police officer shootings. Seems that way to me. Otherwise, why wouldn't she have brought that spurious email to the attention of say his publishers, or just discussed it generally with his readers, or posted it if she really must post it verbatim in one of his other blogs where he is talking about people of color?

Personally, I would never make public something insulting someone wrote about one of my kids. Because I wouldn't promote whatever vile thing someone else said about them by broadcasting it all over the web for public consumption. If I talked about it at all, it would be in general terms and if I showed it to anyone at all it would have been right after the comments were made to me and it would be for the purposes of exacting a retraction or apology - maybe even vengeance (like getting the person fired if they made such comments in their professional capacity for example if they were my kid's teacher). I sure wouldn't hang on to it, then post it on the world wide web for all to see when the author was writing about something completely different. Think about it, what good really came out of that?

If Josh actually did write that, it wasn't cool. My guess would be it was written in anger after a pretty heated exchange between the two of them. Not excusing it, but God knows most of us have cracked off something in anger to hurt. That doesn't mean we are evil. But the point is, that email exchange was only BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM. Josh didn't publicly insult a child. The child's mother did. And you have to wonder about that...

lallaw April 21, 5:12 p.m.

And btw, one negative comment does not a racist make. "Racist" is a pretty strong, negative, nasty epitaph in and of it self and should not just be chucked at someone like a rock-laden snowball because they make a statement that's not pc. Racism is a way of life, a belief that one race is superior to another and therefore that justifies the mistreatment of the supposed "inferior" race.

No where, in anything Josh Board has written, is there support for any of the above. I think people should be very careful when they sling that word around to both ensure it lands at the feet of someone who actually does fit the definition, and not diminish its meaning by making it the social equivalent of "have a nice day."

kellydavis April 21, 6:57 p.m.

Own up to what, Nacho? Having a liberal bias? We've never claimed to not be a left-leaning publication. And my comment about how I'll write what I want was in response to Josh, not you.

Josh, what makes you think that we're so dead-set anti-police? Educate yourself, my man, and you'll see that you're wrong. Take a gander at John Lamb's Spin Cycle column that comes out tomorrow. The majority of it is an interview with the head of the POA about how pay cuts will affect the police force. Or, look at what I wrote a few weeks back about deserved overtime pay for cops and firefighters. Or Eric Wolff's piece about how police officers injured on the job (one of them while chasing a dude with a gun, no less) are being harassed by the city. All those articles are pretty gasp pro-cop. We've never, ever said that every time a cop shoots a civilian, it's wrong. We've never, ever said that cops should never use deadly force. I dare you to find a time when either of those things have been printed in CityBeat. Find it and I'll buy you a frickin' steak dinner at Albie's.

One more thing—-a couple of years ago, the Reader did a story about David "The Waterman" Ross. A few weeks back he was body slammed by a cop for no good reason, according to David and dozens of witnesses. Do you think David is lying? Do you think he deserved what he got? Talk to John Brizzolara and get back to me.

Lalaw: Here's a link to my Zavala story:

http://tinyurl.com/d52a4y

And an overview of the Jacob Faust case:

http://tinyurl.com/cbd5py

JoshBoard April 21, 7:02 p.m.

To respond to the latest:

Heather, you get props for the word "moronathon." I like it. But as lall said above, she brought her kid into it. Not by posting that, BUT by putting photos of her kid all over her website. Why do that? If you want to be like the Octomom, and exploit your kids, that isn't cool. And if you do that, you have to think there are crazy people out there. What if some pedophile liked the photo she has on her site of the kid in sunglasses, looking "adult". It's the same way I was disgusted by the Ramsey parents for dressing up their kid in Colorado. If aaryn craves attention, that's one thing. But she should do so without using her kid as a pawn in it.

Mel, if what you say is true about the case, why in the world, would the family settle for $300,000? They'd easily get $3 million in a lawsuit. I'm no lawyer, but I know that. Wrongfull death gets you the big bucks. Especially, from the cops. With all those witnesses, that would've been an easy win for them. In regards to why the police would pay that if they didn't do anything wrong...that's something I've complained about before (even on blogs...which yes, I get paid handsomely to provide). The cops said in a statement, it's easier to pay off, because you don't know how a jury will side with a grieving family or not. And, even if they win, the legal fees are often more than just paying out the 300K.

Lall, good points, as always. My girlfriend logged on yesterday, read all this, and is a bit disgusted by me because of the kid comments. Luckily, she knows I'm not racist. But still...you never like having someone you care about think less of you.

NachoDaddy April 21, 7:17 p.m.

Again? Jesus, Kelly. I wrote that to give CityBeat credit for being up front about their political stance. CityBeat was my example of "how to," not "how not to." On the other hand, sorry about the mix up on the direction of your statement.

Lallaw -- great job. Especially about the responsibility of statements. I think I said it before (back in Ch. 6 of this thread) that there seems to be a lot of retaliation, and not a lot of discussion.

lallaw April 21, 7:21 p.m.

Hey Joshb: It's been my experience that municipal entities do not pay unless they feel they have some exposure. Legal costs don't really bother them because they usually have in-house counsel on the payroll. For a Plaintiff's lawyer they are the most difficult to sue successfully as they generally do not settle and costs for them are negligible ... the cost of doing business. Not saying this is always the case, but unless they hired outside counsel in my experience they litigate if there's no liability.

Settlement rarely has much to do with justice, however. I would guess the Plaintiff wanted more and the Defense wanted to pay less. Settlement is about making a cost-effective resolution of a disputed matter. If the Plaintiff's had no case, judges are real quick to get rid of these types of claims on a summary judgment motion - basically saying there are no trialable issues of material fact for a jury to decide. In other words, sorry no case or no cause of action the law provides for.

A $300,000 settlement is a pretty good chunk for a municipality to pay out...not the biggest settlement...but 9.5 times out of 10 if a defendant pays a six figure settlement, their lawyers counseled them to do so because they did something wrong or violated procedure, etc., which means they could get tagged for more by a jury. Not sure how liberal San Diego County juries are, but federal juries are generally pretty conservative and they like policemen, and doctors, and business people and hate "whiney plaintiffs." Just my 2 cents. :)

melbamoose April 21, 7:36 p.m.

I agree with you, Josh. They could have gone to trial and got much more. But I'm sure you can appreciate how emotionally taxing a long court case can be for the family; can you imagine having to sit through pictures of your son bleeding to death in the street or hear cops lie to protect themselves about how your son 'had it coming'? Not to mention all of the appeals that would automatically get filed by the city if they were to lose leading to years of litigation. It isn't about the money, it is about ACCOUNTABILITY. The Fausts had no way of learning what really happened without suing. If the cops did right by Jake, the city would never have emptied their pockets. I respect Jake's Mom's choice to settle and try to put this nightmare behind her.

lallaw April 21, 7:47 p.m.

Melbamoose: You're right. The Plaintiffs did the right thing by settling in terms of how horrifically painful trials in these types of case are for the litigating families. I think both sides were wise to resolve the matter between themselves, and my condolences go out to the Faust family. They will never get over what happened no matter what the "true" version of all the facts are - they lost their son. How does one recover from that?

But I will say that if the Faust's lawyer thought they had no exposure, no chance of losing and a million dollar case... no way that lawyer would let them settle for $300,000. And they wouldn't want to either. They would demand their day in court no matter how miserable an experience it sure would be. Because it would have validated them. But it is a very very rare case where one side is all right and did nothing wrong. Usually, fault lies around the 60/40 line. I suspect there was something that the Faust's attorney recognized could lead the jury to come back with a "not guilty." Plaintiff's in these cases don't usually pay attorneys fees up front...so unless they did (or costs)...they had some exposure too.

melbamoose April 21, 8:41 p.m.

You have every right to your suspicions. I know the lawyer stood behind the case and wanted to go to court. I also know he wanted Jake's Mom to choose something she could live with and supported her. He was tremendous throughout the whole ordeal. The goal was truth. They didn't fool themselves into thinking real justice could actually be achieved. The system isn't set up that way. They wanted to know what happened. They wanted to know what Jake did as much as what Officers Holiday and Stephens did. They learned what they suspected. That SDPD wasn't telling the truth and their son was senselessly shot.

Sadly, the SDPD is happy (I'm sure) that the citizens are complicit, just like JoshB, and will go along with whatever they do, no questions asked. I am still so blown away that he thinks the police don't need to be held accountable for anything they do. At this point, getting the city to shell out some $$ was one of the only options. I'd be upset, as a taxpayer, that the city is more interested in paying people out instead of preventing these atrocities to begin with.

Thank you for understanding how torturous it was for the family. Imagine how torturous it continues to be with people like Josh supporting the unwarranted shootings by the SDPD of its citizens.

It is what it is at this point. The Reader should do a story on what really happened now that those police reports have been disclosed. But instead we get a blogger mad that accountability was asked for at all??

JoshBoard April 21, 9:19 p.m.

Two things...first, I don't ALWAYS side with cops. Hence my more recent blog on how that cop should be fired in PA for laughing about a shooting victim and the victims mother reacting to it.

Second...I have officially changed my mind in the Faust case. Having read Lalls points, I agree. That the cops wouldn't have paid out that sum of money if they felt they did nothing wrong.

And mel, you made me think about the movie The Verdict, where Paul Newman is an alcoholic lawyer, who is about to lose everything. He gets an easy case, that his clients just want to settle for a small bit of change. He realizes how wrong the people were to have killed their kid at this hospital, and refuses to settle. The family is furious (even punching him, I believe), and he ends up winning them millions that they wouldn't have gotten in a settlement.

I saw that movie when I was 15, but I remember so clearly, how sometimes people settle just because it's easier (and often cheaper).

But...I think if the police didn't do a thing wrong, on principle, they would've fought this and not settled.

So, I'm retracted what I initially felt on this case, and agree that it was a shooting that didn't need to happen.

Now, my anger goes to this (and I hate this about the police). The officer that did the shooting, SHOULD be held accountable. I don't know enough about the case to know if that means him being fired, or just suspended (and re-trained) for a certain length of time. But, this is one thing I have always assumed about the cops. They probably feel like if they suspend the officer, that that IS admitting guilt. And they'd rather not deal with public asking questions like "If you are suspending him for doing something wrong, why not fire him?" or "If you are disciplining this officer, why not try him for murder?" etc etc.

melbamoose April 21, 9:37 p.m.

good. you should learn more about these things BEFORE you start spouting off but I appreciate you changing your stance.

NachoDaddy April 21, 9:48 p.m.

That "9th best friend" line was great.

lallaw April 21, 9:52 p.m.

C'mon Melbamoose, what more do you want from Joshb? Good of you to appreciate his thoughtful recant. (And kinda gusty of him don't you think with all the vitriol that's has been leveled against him?) But somewhat of a backhanded thank you from him. Obviously, you are close to this situation and my God I cannot imagine the pain, anger, all out bitterness that I would feel if I were close to this situation as you are. But without Joshb "spouting" off, there would have been no real discussion of the matter..no true airing of facts that apparently a lot of people did not know about. His blog ended up doing a good deed, and maybe opened up some other minds on the matter who were not willing to post.

Without this type of discussion very little change is made in society. It used to be that people discussed such things at the well, or in the coffee house, or at a community church gathering. But now we are more isolated from each other. The only way we connect and work through the things that trouble us is through this medium. Through blogs like Josh Board's. We can't trust 100% what we hear on the news, but because he not only had the guts to post his opinion but also the temerity to respond to each and every critic and then, hell, say he had changed his mind on the Faust case there's been some healing.

I think that is a good thing. And who knows, maybe some change will come out of it too because people clearly are NOT happy with cops who shoot first and ask questions later. Be glad he "spouted off" and give him some credit for starting and finishing a debate with thought, reason, and dignity. It is a blog, not a news article...so a little leeway should be given, including misspelling a word. Please give my best to the Faust family.

lallaw April 21, 9:59 p.m.

NachoDaddy: that "Ch. 6" like was pretty funny too! And hey, who's your baby? lol... (just couldn't resist :). Appreciate your thoughtful and balanced comments. Always centering to have a voice of reason about.

JoshBoard April 22, 12:38 a.m.

Well Mel, here's the problem with your statement about me "learning more" before spouting off. And, not to toot my own horn, but I don't need to learn more if the folks out there that did all the research present it to me. Because, I'll clearly change my mind if I was wrong.

The folks at the other publication wouldn't do that.

And the reason I just immediately side with the cops...well, I'll give you two examples. The poster here (Drew), told a story. Does anyone REALLY believe that happened? Think about how crazy it sounds.

Another example was something I saw on the news today. There was a car accident and some joker pulled over to film it. A Latino cop told the person to leave the scene. He was a bit angry about it, and sternly told the guy to leave. The guy wouldn't. As the cop got angrier, he THEN admitted to being a TV news reporter (although he wasn't in a news van). He tells the cameraman to keep filming and won't leave. The cop gets angrier, before finally cuffing this guy as he keeps telling the cameraman and the cop "I'm doing nothing wrong here. You know, we got all this on tape," to which the cop replies "so what! I don't care."

They are both arrested.

Now Mel...I guarantee all these cop haters are going to see this and think the officer was wrong to manhandle these guys, etc. But the guys wouldn't leave the scene as asked. And this isn't a scene like the Rodney King beating. I'm willing to guess that the cop wanted the area cleared because it's a safety hazard to have vehicles pulling over on a freeway.

There was another story years ago, where a player on the Chargers got pulled over for something. He fit the description of a call the cop got. Instead of just doing exactly what he was told, he angrily asked the cop what was going on, so the cop got him on the ground at gun point and cuffed him. It was implied that the cop did this to the player because he was a big black guy, driving an Escalade. When the simple fact is....the guy fit the description. You can show your drivers license and hammer it all out without being difficult, and the cop probably won't be difficult.

Instead, everyone just goes down a path of the big, bad cops walking around like thugs with badges. And it gets tiring. It's easier for me to go under the assumption that the cops are doing the right thing, and once in a while a criminal complains about it. Or a regular citizen that was in the wrong place at the right time. I like to think the facts eventually come out.

Using your logic about me thinking before I go off...well, Lall said it best. But, I did a blog recently about ice cream flavors I wished there were. And someone posted that there was a chocolate cookie dough flavor out there. Should I have Googled first, to be assured there wasn't already the ice cream flavor I yearned for?

I understand in a shooting that resulted in a death there's more on the line.

lallaw April 22, 1:58 a.m.

Anyone who does not do a "yes sir," or "yes mam," to any police officer that directs them to cease, desist, leave, provide ID, put their hands wherever, get down on the ground, or drop it is simply asking for trouble. They are putting themselves in danger. I always told my sons, at that point they are IN CHARGE. It does not matter one bit if they are right or not. They have all the power, all the authority and you do not. So check your ego and be polite and compliant. Eventually, if they have the wrong person or you have a reasonable request, it will come out and the vast majority of the time you will be fine. The point is: they have a gun and they are allowed to use it. You do not know what you got at the other end of that gun; they are a lawful authority. Josh is dead on with this point. It is just plain stupid not to listen to them, and frankly really irritating when someone does not then the worst case scenario happens and they yell, "police brutality." I'm not speaking for Josh here, but seems to me that was his point: do what the cops say, nobody gets hurt. That doesn't mean he or any of the other posters are saying cops are always right. He's given plenty examples of when they are not.

My niece, whom I love dearly and who lived with me for many years, has a terrible attitude about police officers. She also went through a period where she drank more than she should. She gets in a car, admittedly drunk, and gets pulled over. (Thank God). She was in the wrong. But she got mouthy with the police and called them names. Well, upsettingly, they slammed her beautiful face into the trunk of her car several times. And she looked like she had been beat up - punched in the face frankly. I'm kind of choked up as I write this, and I was really upset when I saw her face. But I had to say to her and to myself: darlin I love you but you were an idiot to call the police "pigs" and resist arrest. You were wrong. Point being, they shouldn't do it but they can do it so why the hell push that button? And sometimes they have very good reasons for telling you to do something and we put them in a position to make that choice for us, like it or not.

JoshBoard April 22, 9:24 a.m.

The above story is EXACTLY why I contacted the police about a year ago. I told them, from stories I've heard and things I've seen on shows (like COPS), the police need to be trained to deal with taunting better, and not just take comments personally. It's becoming a PR nightmare for them. The thing is, these are regular people. And if you're mouthing off to them, they're going to get mad. In my opinion, they should be above that. Or hell, they can actually have fun with it, without getting phsical. For example, if I was a cop and pulled someone over and they started mouthing off, I'd casually tell them this stop is now going to take a lot longer than it would've. I might also say, "Oh...I notice this is also wrong with your car. I may not have noticed that if you weren't being such a jerk, but now that I see that...I'm citing you for that as well."

I'm not saying it would get to me smashing their taillight with my billyclub and saying "You gots a busted light here!" But...a cop could get under your skin without being a nut job, if you do it to them first.

I originally sided with the police against this local musician, because of the amount of people I've seen in clubs that get drunk, and bouncers have the worst time dealing with them and trying to 86 'em. I always think...if this was a cop, somebody would be getting shot right now!

But, even if you watch a show like COPS, you see times were the police themselves, make situations worse. But as rickeysays said, they aren't paid to be nice and kiss your butt. They're doing a job, and it must get tiring for them to always hear excuses or get yelled at.

Although, that's why I say, that stuff should be dealt with better in their training procedures.

SpliffAdamz_ April 22, 9:39 a.m.

Any black man that calls another black man a racist after knowing what blacks went through here in amerikkka is a idiot. So calling Al Sharpton a racist , joshb you are not even worth listen to because you are an azz kisser of the government that brought your ancestors over here and has treated them like shyt up until the day i wrote this blog. For any one that don't like the way i spell amerikkka , don't hate on me. It's not my fault that's how amerikkka was founded and they have been practicing racism since day one!!!!!

melbamoose April 22, 11:32 a.m.

I commend Josh for changing his mind. I also stand by everything I said. If he knew the facts, the discussion could have started more productively from the start. Now that we know they were in the wrong, it took over 50+ posts to let him see he had it wrong from the beginning. (Not that I mind the posting because I feel strongly enough that Jake's story needs a voice.)

This is not the first blog to talk about Jake's case. 4 years ago the UT forum was quick to come to the cops' defense and 100s of posts ensued. When the settlement was announced a couple weeks ago, there were plenty of people on signonsandiego who were upset the city paid $ to a person whom they felt deserved to be killed.

The truth is, Jake DID do everything he was being asked to do by the cops. Eyewitness statements attest to this. He didn't struggle nor put up a fight. He made a left against a posted sign and wound up shot to death less than 30 minutes later.

There have been other threads. If the Reader was serious about reporting, why wouldn't they want to do a story on this? Why won't the UT admit what they printed was false. Why don't they want to print the truth. The fact of the matter is that CityBEAT and a couple other indie rags have been the ONLY press interested in actually talking to the Fausts. They were the only people who told the victim's side of the story.

The one thing SD can do at this point, is be mad and demand accountability. Don't brush off these stories as ridiculous and assume the cops are always in the right. And please, do not say it is "I found it equally or more horrible, that you would say cops should be held accountable. Accountable, for what?!?!?" I hope if anything comes from this discussion, it is that you will see how no one is above the law and EVERYONE needs to be held accountable for their actions.

lallaw, that story about your niece is HORRIFIC. I am SO soory to hear that. I completely agree she shouldn't have been driving drunk nor calling the police names (two things Jake wasn't doing, for the record), but do you really believe it warranted her getting her head slammed into the car repeatedly???

SDaniels April 22, 11:52 a.m.

SpliffAdamz, I sincerely like the way you write, and love the "Z" effect. Curious: Do you always flame in person, too? Or do you have reasonable, involved conversations? Since you flame everyone, I didn't take it personally when you ranted back at me in the thread for the story about the Chapel of Happiness (or The Hapel of Chappiness, as my grandmother and I used to call it). Thing is, you seemed to take our complaints about loud churches driving out residents as some kind of racist commentary, when clearly, it was not meant to be. I think if you were driven out of your home by 24 hours of amplified noise, maybe you would have been sympathetic? It would be great to hear some constructive thoughts from you in the threads about Tijuana, because I sense that you have studied and lived a lot.

It can be maddening to see everything in black & white, all of the time. I went through a period of being angry and righteous all of the time myself, when I started taking cultural studies classes at UCSD, and joined a PAC there. The Amerikkka" doesn't bother me, nor does it when people write U$$A, etc. I'm sure you'll write back some cantankerous thing about not needing anyone's approval, but this is to say that I do appreciate your position, and you don't have to prove to me that you can back some of your attitude up with both theory and fact.

Either way, keeping doing what you do, Spliff. Always an interesting read.

lallaw April 22, 1:55 p.m.

Dear MelbaM.: Please don't misunderstand my point, and thank you for your sentiments about my niece. I realize it is a fine point, but I am NOT saying that the cops were warranted, i.e., "justified" in smashing my niece's face into the trunk of her car, especially since she was already cuffed and under their control at that point. It was horrific, foul, and illegal. What I am saying is we should all realize it can happen at the hands of a cop (not a police officer), especially if we put ourselves in a position of risk. From everything I have read to date about Jake Faust, he did not put himself in a position of risk with his moving violation. I would like to read more about his case. However, my dear niece, whom I love like a daughter did put herself in that position by provoking the officers who stopped her. She had the misfortune of being stopped by a cop who has a reputation, apparently, for violence. (This incident did not take place in San Diego). My statement goes back to my earlier post where I indicated that we should always be respectful and compliant with police officers, but don't necessarily give them your blind trust. Be wary, maybe even a little afraid, and be smart if you find yourself in a confrontation with a police officer. It is not a confrontation you are going to win with insults, arguments, or resistance.

Please know I am not referring to Jake when I say the above. Would you mind writing what happened during that traffic stop? And it always makes me laugh how so many otherwise reasonable citizens get angry with the wronged party (the Plaintiff and the attorney in this case) because money was paid out of community coffers to them. How about getting angry with the guys who did the deed that caused the litigation in the first place?!! Why isn't there more public OUTRAGE leveled at the Defendant and/or their attorney?

In the case of police matters such as Jake's case, if the police officers were made personally liable for any settlement or jury verdict that was the result of a wrongful shooting or use of excessive force I believe we would see two immediate results: 1) officers would be a lot more careful out there when it came to using force; and, 2) the City Attorney would be a lot more willing to settle cases where settlement was appropriate instead of litigating the matter both in court and through the media. Not to mention, a personal judgment in California is good for 10 years and can be renewed in perpetuity until it is paid. Wage garnishments, reasonable seizures of property would mean the guys in the wrong would pay the community back. A community that has been twice wronged by them through the loss of capital and the loss of a decent, otherwise viable citizen.

melbamoose April 22, 2:36 p.m.

I agree completely, lallaw. I have been typing all of this with my left hand because I am laid up at home with a busted right-wrist. I will see if I can get you the details of the stop. I know Jake's mother would prefer to have check in hand before feeling comfortable telling all details learned in discovery. Kelly Davis knows a great deal as she has written several articles in CityBEAT on Jake's case. She has been amazing and I don't blame her reactions to JoshB one iota.

JoshBoard April 22, 5:27 p.m.

mel..sorry to hear about your wrist. the thing i'm curious about the faust case is "all these witnesses" everyone talked about. at a traffic stop, how can there be so many multiple witnesses, as to whether or not a cop needed to fire?

was the car full of people? did other drivers know what was being said or reached for? i'm guessing no.

melbamoose April 22, 5:46 p.m.

it happened in the middle of the gaslamp district.

JoshBoard April 22, 11:47 p.m.

Then with all these witnesses, WHY would the cop have been cleared in the shooting? What was deemed "justified"?

melbamoose April 23, 1:41 a.m.

Good question!! because the DA just rubber stamps? I don't know that any cop has been found guilty of anything. No one polices the police. In my opinion, the press should be doing more of that. This whole thing is about ACCOUNTABILITY. It should be demanded.

You should ask the city these questions. Ask the DA.

I don't have access to details of cases other than Jake's. Below is a list of shootings since Jake. Use your press pass to learn more! SD kills more people than NY.

melbamoose April 23, 1:42 a.m.

List of Police involved shootings in San Diego since Jacobs killing:

December 06, 2008- RICO, RYAN JACOB - Non-fatal shooting of Ryan Jacob Rico on December 6,, 2008 involving Valley Center Sheriff's Deputies May 30, 2008- CULLEY, ALEXANDER JAMES- Fatal Shooting on May 30, 2008 by San Diego Police Officer Javier Carranza January 22, 2008- GAUTIER, PATRICK LOREN- Non-fatal shooting on January 22, 2008 by San Diego Police Officer Lawrence Adair November 23, 2007- MUDD, GREGORY ALLEN- Fatal Shooting on November 23, 2007 by San Diego Police Sergeant Jeffery Sterling October 29, 2007- EDEZA, ISSAC AGUILERA - Non-fatal shooting on October 29, 2007 by San Diego Police Officer Larry E Wilson August 22, 2007- MACKEY, KATHERINE- Non-fatal shooting on August 22, 2007 by San Diego Police Officer Mario Romano August 07, 2007- MARTINEZ III, DARIO AMADOR- Fatal shooting on August 7, 2007 by San Diego police detectives William Pettus and David Highsmith July 24, 2007- LONG, DOMINIC- Fatal shooting on July 24, 2007 by San Diego Police Officer Travis Hamby June 28, 2007- JIMENEZ-YEPEZ, RAUL- Non-fatal shooting on June 28, 2007 by El Cajon Police Officers Mark Bevans and Jarred Slocum April 18, 2007- WHITE, MAURICE ANTOINE - Fatal Shooting on April 18, 2007 by San Diego Police Officers Scott Spillane and Adam Sharki February 10, 2007- ROJAS-GODINEZ, NOE- Fatal Shooting on Febuary 10, 2007 by San Diego Police Officers Jack Pearson and Paul Galante December 23, 2006- EHLING, SAMUEL- Fatal shooting by San Diego Sheriff's Deputy Chris Steffen November 16, 2006- MEDINA, ROBERT JOHN- Fatal Shooting on November 16, 2006 by CHP Officer Leo Nava October 21, 2006- LOPEZ, DAVID ARNULFO- Fatal shooting by San Diego Sheriff's Deputies Shawn Aitken,Jacob Pavlenko and Jonathan Feeteau October 09, 2006- LAMONT WHALUM, ARTEMIS- Non-Fatal Shooting on October 9, 2006 by El Cajon Police Officer Jacob Cutting September 17, 2006- HAYES, SHANE ANTHONY- Fatal Shooting on September 17, 2006 by San Diego Sheriff's Department Deputies Michael King and Susan Geer September 16, 2006- TRACE, MATTHEW - Non-fatal shooting on Sep. 16, 2006 by San Diego Police Officer Michael Belz September 03, 2006- FOLEY, STEVE - Non-Fatal Shooting on Sep. 3, 2006 by Coronado Police Officer Aaron Mansker August 30, 2006- GARCIA, JOSUE NARVAEZ- Fatal Shooting on August 30, 2006 by Oceanside Police Officer Clint Bussey August 14, 2006- CHERRY, ALBERT- Non-fatal Shooting on August 14, 2006 by Sheriff's Deputy Carlos Serrato July 28, 2006- PERAZA, ALBERTO CRUZ- In-custody death of Ramel Lemuel Henderson on July 28, 2006 involving San Diego Police Officers Ernest Pierce, Charles Nagy, Shannon Hart, Matt Randolph, Leslie Stewart and Lori Nelson

melbamoose April 23, 1:43 a.m.

June 28, 2006- RAY, JONATHAN MICHAEL - Fatal shooting on June 28, 2006 by San Diego Police Officer David Collins May 30, 2006- HENDERSON, RAMEL LEMUEL- In-custody death of Ramel Lemuel Henderson on May 30, 2007 involving San Diego Police Officers Maruisz Csas, Steve Bourasa, Randy Burgess, Robert Clark, Mike Hall, Dave Hustad, Robert Leffler, Eric Miller, Victor Rodriquez and Akaan Thomas May 21, 2006- CARDOSO, DANIEL - Non-fatal shooting on May 21, 2006 by San Diego Police Officer Juan Cisneros March 06, 2006- SLOAN, WILLIAM GEORGE- Non-fatal shooting and suicide of William George Sloan on March 6, 2006 by Escondido Policie Officers Matthew Nelson and Craig Miller March 05, 2006- NAGRAMPA, ARDEL - Non-fatal shooting on March 5, 2006 by San Diego Police Officer Daniel McLaughlin February 11, 2006- KRECA, MICHAEL ELI - Fatal shooting on Feb. 11, 2006 by San Diego Police Officer Elmer Edwards February 09, 2006- WELLMAN, MICHAEL HALE - Fatal shooting on Feb. 9, 2006 by Escondido Police Officer Greg Kogler January 26, 2006- DRINKARD, KENNETH - Fatal shooting on Jan. 26, 2006 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputy Enrique Diaz January 03, 2006- PEARCE, ASHLEY B. - Non-fatal shooting on Jan. 3, 2006 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputy Michael Neumann December 27, 2005- WILLIAMS, TREVELL DASHAN - Fatal shooting on Dec. 27, 2005 by Sergeant Mickey Williams November 21, 2005- FACEN, VANESSA- In-custody death of Vanessa Facen on November 21, 2005 involving San Diego Sheriff's Deputies Daryl Spillman, Michael Pata, Ken Feistel, Christi Lucidine, Garner Davis, Brian Hout, Brad Farr, Ken Hunrichs, Jonathan Deering, Robert Martinez, Crystal Bartlett, Richard San ches, Ronnie Hudson, Sergeant Ed Meeks and La Mesa Police Officer Jeffrey Chambers November 19, 2005- YERGER, GEORGE SHALL JR.- Fatal shooting on Nov. 19, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputy William Kerr November 10, 2005- RHODES, FRANKLIN JOSEPH - Fatal shooting on Nov. 10, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Department Correctional Deputy Richard Crites

melbamoose April 23, 1:44 a.m.

October 27, 2005- JUAREZ, SANTINO - Fatal shooting on Oct. 27, 2005 involving San Diego Police Officers Larry Adair, Michael Arellano, Joshua Dafoe, Jonathan Gray, Shaun Henry, Peter Mills, Philip Martz, David Moya, & Hans Zingheim, and National City Police Officer Derek Aydelotte October 15, 2005- MALO, JIMMY SIMEONA - Non-fatal shooting on Oct. 15, 2005 by Oceanside Police Officer Dwight Ayers October 14, 2005- GARCIA, DANIEL - Non-fatal shooting on Oct. 14, 2005 by San Diego Police Officer Scott James August 15, 2005- ALTAMIRANO, VENANCIO GARCIA - Fatal shooting on Aug. 15, 2005 by San Diego Police Officers David Moya & Emilio Ramirez August 14, 2005- LAZOS, ARMANDO - Fatal shooting on Aug. 14, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Corporal Joseph Tomaiko and National City Police Department personnel Sergeants David Espiritu & William Strasen, Detective David Bavencoff, and Officers Damian Ballardo, Kenneth Springer, Alex Hernandez, Luke Powell & Gregory Dumas August 10, 2005- AWOTUNDUN, OLORUNYOMI- Fatal shooting on Aug. 10, 2005 by Oceanside Police Officer Fletcher Stone August 01, 2005- MANZO, JESUS EDUARDO - Fatal shooting on August 1, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputy Lewis Schott July 29, 2005- RAMIREZ, JORGE - Fatal shooting on July 29, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputy Mark Ritchie July 28, 2005- GARCIA-VASQUEZ, SERGIO - Fatal shooting on July 28, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputies Shawn Aitken & John Spach June 25, 2005- MORALES-CARBAJAL, RICARDO - Fatal shooting on June 25, 2005 by San Diego Police Officer Phillip K. Bozarth June 06, 2005- GIFFEN, TOMMY R. - Non-fatal shooting on June 6, 2005 by San Diego County Sheriff's Deputy Scott Carter May 19, 2005- COOK, DEMONE EDWARD - Fatal shooting on May 19, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputy Michael Baker May 15, 2005- TORRES, ROMAN - Fatal shooting on May 15, 2005 by San Diego Sheriff's Deputies John Spach & Clayton Lisk April 04, 2005- FAUST, JACOB RICHARD - Fatal shooting on April 4, 2005 by San Diego Police Officer Stephen Holliday

lallaw April 23, 2:39 a.m.

My God, melbamoose, that is impressive. Especially since you injured your dominant arm and are typing one-handed! Clearly there is a lot more to this issue than meets the eye, and you are right there needs to be more accountability and I would add, scrutiny. We don't (at least I don't) know all of the facts for each of the above cases but it is a powerful list. Thank you for taking the time to post it.

As I've written before I used to live in Humboldt County (Northern CA) when I was transferred there for work. There's a major drug problem up there, and some very poorly trained, twitchy officers by their own admission. I was taken aback when I learned that out of the 10 fatal shooting deaths in Humboldt the first 3 months of that year, 6 were the result of a police shooting; 60% of all deaths by gun shot in that community were caused by the police in barely 3 months!! They also had 3 major lawsuits for excessive force against the police department. Two went to verdict and resulted in multi-million dollar judgments; one was settled for one million. Immediately thereafter, the reigning police chief "resigned" and they brought in a guy to "shake things up." They held multiple town meetings in which people railed about what was going on with the police department: the beatings and shoot-outs in the downtown area against citizens (one was a woman threatening to kill herself...she leaned out of the window and she was blown away) with innocent citizens crouching in doorways. To his credit he admitted mistakes had been made and he dismissed several officers and called for re-training of the rest.

He took a lot of heat. But I will say none of the changes would have occurred BUT for all of the media coverage in that area scrutinizing the actions of the police force and each and every death at the hands of a police officer. Some people were killed while in custody! The media did not let up, and may have been slanted against the force but the end result was it made for a more transparent force which owned up to its mistakes and need for reform. So you have a point, in that as what started this blog: if you have nothing to hide, then there's nothing to worry about...that holds true for the Police as well, right?

Lastly, many of the issues you raised about difficulties in getting information, police reports, etc., are often caused by two factors: 1) internal police procedures which slow everything down; and, 2) the lawyers representing the City and the officers accused. Especially the lawyers, because I know for a fact they will not let any paperwork be disseminated until they review it first. And if it is really damaging they will at least try and claim it is "privileged" and therefore non-discoverable, it they are acting ethically. They aren't doing this to protect the officers as much as the City's coffers. It was one aspect of the legal practice I could not stomach.

Were all of the above individuals killed by an officer?

melbamoose April 23, 11:59 a.m.

i copied and pasted the list. they are all police involved shootings since Jake was killed 4 years ago.

it is about accountability. the cops need our trust to do their jobs well. wouldn't you trust them more if they transparently dealt with their own who did wrong? i certainly would. SD needs to know they can be the Fausts just as easily as anyone else. i've put out a press release about jake related memorials, fundraisers, peaceful demonstrations since he was killed. perhaps if they knew SD would be interested in knowing about abuse of force and power in the cops and city they'd take a bigger interest?

10news did a report on this before jake's case was settled. you should watch the piece. there is also raw video from the president of the police officers association and mike marrinan, a civil rights attorney. you should watch both of those, too. franly, if everything the cop rep said were true, we wouldn't have a problem. but actions speak louder than words. full piece: http://mfile.akamai.com/12922/wmv/vod.ibsys.com/2008/1127/18156251.200k.asx article: http://www.10news.com/investigations/18148397/detail.html marrinan raw vid: http://mfile.akamai.com/12922/wmv/vod.ibsys.com/2008/1126/18148100.200k.asx bill nemec raw vid: http://mfile.akamai.com/12922/wmv/vod.ibsys.com/2008/1126/18154214.200k.asx

JoshBoard April 23, 4:12 p.m.

A cop that played on my high school basketball team...I read about him in the paper. He pulled some joker over and was walking to the car. He heard a noise. A bullet wizzin' right by him. He dropped to a knee, unloaded, and killed the guy.

As rickeysays said, the police deal with the scum of the earth. On a daily basis.

A sheriff friend of mine named Dan, told me of how he'd be in Oceanside in his cop car, and these gang members would just start yelling crap at him. He'd ignore it.

I'm willing to bet that list you posted, 98% of them were justified shootings. The other 2%, were probably people that weren't outstanding members of society, that just happened to get shot. But maybe they shouldn't have been (if that makes sense).

My point though, with CityBeat is...well, Kelly came on her and kept knocking my boss. Saying it's their papers right to do that, because of his belief. Well, how interesting is that for their few readers? Do they want to keep reading about him? I'm guessing not. So personal vendettas, in a paper, make the paper look bad. Readers of those things just lose interest, or they feel like screaming "yeah, we get the point. he feels this way about that topic, get over it."

And, speaking of the CityBeat people...they posted my email address on various websites, asking people to write hate mail. Including to this publication.

I've gotten a big....ONE LETTER, of complaint.

But still, it's the point of the thing. That's rather bushleague to do this. Very unprofessional.

melbamoose April 23, 4:49 p.m.

aren't you doing the same thing here about citybeat? or its ok cause they started it? frankly, i don't know much about nor care about your feud. you posted outrageous (imo) statements about always accepting whatever cops do and ignorant opinions on Jacob Faust and his senseless killing. to me, this is about you and police accountability. if 2% of that list was in error, the police need to admit that and strive toward not repeating those errors again.

JoshBoard April 24, 12:27 a.m.

Very true, mel. But don't people, periodicals, etc...need to stop acting like the police are running around just shooting and killing people?

lallaw April 24, 2:05 a.m.

I would strongly agree that the media has a heightened responsibility to keep us all honest and accountable (especially public figures which include all police officers), provide an open forum to air disputes (ALL opinions should be allowed expression); and, not slant the facts toward their own personal political agenda UNLESS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE EDITORIAL PAGE OR AN ONLINE BLOG, such as this one. People come here expecting to read someone's perspective or opinion and engage in a factual debate; not true of a reported news item. I have long disliked the reporting of what amounts to personal bias as factual news on the front page, online news articles, or TV "news" programs. Whatever happened to "just the facts ma'am"?

The power of the media is tremendous. Therefore their responsibility to all of us is onerous and not for the weak of knee'd or mind or intent. The search for the truth continues....

melbamoose April 24, 10:23 a.m.

so your point applies to the Editorial Josh is all upset about, then.

josh, innocent people are getting killed. that's what everyone should be upset about, not that some press is actually talking about it. The Faust family is forever indebted to citybeat for actually taking the time to look into Jake's case and report his side as well.

JoshBoard April 24, 10:30 a.m.

Well, that's a good point, mel. It was on their editorial page.

SpliffAdamz_ April 24, 10:51 a.m.

SDaniels - The only problem i have is when people side with the oppressor when they are being oppressed by the oppressor. People think cops never do wrong , but forget being a cop is really just a job. What needs to be look at is the person in the uniform and we to understand that a job title doesn't excuse you from bad behavior. Also people need to understand that the police are the governments military , use to keep the citizen here in line. If you are good or bad the government still would love to have every one lock away and used for cheap labor. That's why the prison industry is a billion dollar industry. That's why amerikkka has over a million people behind bars , and mostly for non violent crimes. If i'm firing on people to much , i got to blame my ethics teacher all we did was debate in her class on everything. I'm color blind so don't see everything in black and white , but unlike some people i've realized that if it wasn't for racism there would be no amerikkka.

JoshBoard April 24, 1:55 p.m.

You need to smoke a spliff, and chill out. Not everyone in the government is out to get ya.

I'd be willing to bet, that if the top officials could end crime tomorrow, they would. Sure, they might have to hire out to have license plates made, but...

lallaw April 24, 5:26 p.m.

Spliffbaby: You actually had me agreeing with what you wrote at post #94, then I read this:

"If you are good or bad the government still would love to have every one lock away and used for cheap labor. That's why the prison industry is a billion dollar industry. That's why amerikkka has over a million people behind bars , and mostly for non violent crimes."

Heard my coo-coo clock go off and realized it was time to start dinner.

True though many are in prison for non-violent drug related crimes for drug usage. They should be separated from the prison population and receive treatment/education as abstinence in prison isn't treatment and the criminalization of addiction makes little sense to me. Might have less re-offenders in this class of the prison population. However, trust me many are right where you would want them to be, or are being rightly punished for financial crimes as they should be. But I digress...

SDaniels April 25, 12:02 a.m.

Hey SpliffAdamz, thanks for writing back, and I do hear you on your initial statements about oppressors and oppressees. At the least, we are not a nation of terribly introspective folk, and history class was just like, so boring, right? It sounds like you had a great ethics teacher, and that you are serving as a kind of radical wrench to keep all of our eyes on the prize. Bravo.

Spliff, you say you are color blind. With your statement below and elsewhere, I am just curious. What color do you think joshb is?

"joshb you are not even worth listen to because you are an azz kisser of the government that brought your ancestors over here and has treated them like shyt up until the day i wrote this blog."

JoshBoard April 25, 3:37 a.m.

Yeah, I noticed that, but I didn't mind. Because, I AM NOT RACIST, so why would I mind if someone thought I wasn't a Caucasian?

Just like I don't mind when people think I'm gay, just because I like talking on the phone and what not. I mean...helllo!

But, I digress. You guys are being rather nice to Spliff, which is totally cool. There's always so much fighting on websites with posters. I like this whole vibe we kinda have had going. And if SPliff wants to spout off, it's all good. He just has to have a brain when he does it.

And going on and on about the government, and ameriKKKa and all that crap, is just lame. And makes little sense.

I'm all for pot being legalized, but to act like prisons are just filled with pot smokers, and the government is getting rich from prison labor, is just absurd.

SDaniels April 25, 3:24 p.m.

Hey j. Not to start anything, just to challenge Spliff's statement that he doesn't see color, or isn't stuck seeing everything in black & white. He's got some consistency of opinion as well as a a love of hyperbole, so why not write it out without the flaming invective?

lallaw April 25, 5:30 p.m.

Hey josh: not just pot smokers, but meth, crack, crank, heroin, and prescription pill addicts. Charged with possession (not enough on them to distribute). I don't condone drug use and there has to be a consequence - but "just say no" ain't it - that philosophy doesn't work. They are in the mix in prisons, a very large segment of the prison population at any given facility, being "punished." But punishment is not going to fix the problem. I would rather fix the problem. I'm coming at this from a pragmatic, not bleeding heart point of view. Reduce demand; reduce the market; direct tax dollars elsewhere. It would not cost more to restructure what is already in place. It just requires an open mind and dropping the negative moralistic attitude many have about addiction.

As for the rest of the people in prison, many are right where they belong. Ultimately, that's about choices, not racism.

Visduh April 26, 9:21 p.m.

This is some hot-button issue, from both sides of the fence. I have no memory of any Reader blog or article that scored 100 comments. Maybe someone should publish this article and the comments as a book that does a full airing of opinion and emotion on both (or several) sides of the issue.

But sadly, Josh blew it in one of his replies. In post #11, he alleges that Craig Peyer was "the first officer in the US to ever murder someone while on duty." That's a remarkably absurd claim. Hell, Peyer wasn't even the first CHP officer to be convicted of murdering someone while on duty. A few years prior to his crime, another CHP'er, one in Barstow, was accused of raping and murdering a Las Vegas showgirl who he had pulled over on I-15. The officer's name was Gwaltney or something similar, and was among other things a pillar in his Mormon church.

When the San Bernardino County DA was unable to convict that cop after two tries in state court, the case was passed to the US Attorney who charged him in federal court of a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, as in having violated the civil rights of the victim by killing her without justification. The ex-CHp officer was convicted and sentenced to life in the federal slammer. Murder by any other name is murder.

No Josh, Peyer is one of hundreds (maybe thousands) of cops who have committed murder while on duty in the US, and been convicted. That doesn't disprove your basic point--that we should not contest or resist the police when they order us around. On the other hand, you cannot claim that the cops never use force unnecessarily, or excessively.

JoshBoard April 27, 12:52 a.m.

Hey Vis, thanks for the addition of that story.

When the Craig Peyer case broke (and he was found guilty), I read that Peyer was the first in the U.S. ever charged of that. Sorry if I got my facts wrong. I know I remembered reading that, because it blew me away that that was the case. I know that statistics show that a high number of officers committ suicide. And a high number also abuse their wife (by "high number"...I just mean higher than the average citizen). So, I figured that there had been officers before that did this.

I'll assume your case is accurate and I had that wrong.

(on a side note: we had a Crasher story on escorts that I believe, had 200 replies)

SpliffAdamz_ April 27, 11:41 a.m.

Joshb who really needs a brain? Aren't you the one siding with the government that's over taxing everyone and sending young man and women over seas to die for government interest? Aren't you the one siding with cops who use their job title to be above the law that they enforce? If you don't think the government is making money off the prison system you need to smoke a spliff and not that crack you are use to!! In prison they make furniture , computers , even equipment for the military. Why you think amerikkka is always selling weapons and not buying them , it's because they got a cheap work force in prison. Do you really think the government would stop crime if they wanted to? That's like saying they are going to lower taxes soon. The government isn't going to stop anything they are profiting from. Who's acting like the prison are filled with pot smokers? Just because my name is SPLIFFADAMZ don't get it twisted!! You have to excuse me for shyting on the government that you love so much. But since the amerikkkan government has been in place , people have become more confuse and scared to stand up to authority. Just like when bush muscled his way into office and the amerikkkan people did nothing. You are for legalized pot? I'm not , because cigarettes and alcohol are legal and look how many people die from those two each year.

SDaniels I don't know or even care what joshb color is. But since you were wondering about what i said in my blog , i'll clear it up for ya. We are all off the same race , which is the human race. Only the uneducated and simple minded uses color as a way to keep us separate which happens to be our government. The amerikkkan government has treated every culture like shyt no matter what the color of your skin is. So what ever happens to you and your ethnic culture , happens to us all. So your ancestors are my ancestors and mine are your ours , since we are all part of the human race. Amerikkka enslaved whites just like they enslave every other color of people. Don't forget indenture servitude.

lallaw i feel ya saying that alot of people are in prison because of their choices , but racism dose play a heavy roll on alot of people choices. I'm not saying that you can't get a job because of the color of your skin , but people in amerikkka look at each other different because of the color of skin which makes it harder to live here. This kind of mentality can create more crime , because people got to eat.

lallaw April 27, 12:07 p.m.

SpliffAdamz-you wrote: "lallaw i feel ya saying that alot of people are in prison because of their choices , but racism dose play a heavy roll on alot of people choices. I'm not saying that you can't get a job because of the color of your skin , but people in amerikkka look at each other different because of the color of skin which makes it harder to live here. This kind of mentality can create more crime , because people got to eat."

In that, you have no argument from me. And I thought your assessment of racism was very well said: "(w)e are all off the same race , which is the human race. Only the uneducated and simple minded uses color as a way to keep us separate ..." Excellent and accurate. However, I can't agree it is "the government" doing the above. It certainly may be true that members of the government do that; but, it is equally true that it is the government that is responsible for every single piece of anti-discrimination legislation that has been enacted to combat it. Not just lip service, but a vehicle for real change. Has it been enough or righted all wrongs? Not even close. But not for lack of trying. We are moving in a better and brighter direction...dialog like this blog helps. But rhetoric without action is just that. One action that gave me hope that we are changing, evolving beyond the ugliness of racism - slowly - was the election of Barrack Obama. That's government too, and that ain't all bad.

Visduh nice summary of this blog. I admire your contribution to it and your willingness to read it all!

Melbamoose, I wanted to say that you are right. My above point does apply to any City Beat editorial on this issue (see post #91) AND Josh Board's comments and this blog. Can't give a pass to one without giving it to the other, and that goes for the both of us. Which also means you have to accept the fact that Joshb's opinions have their place and should be allowed a voice without ridicule. It was not City Beat's opinions that bothered me. It was the nasty-gram delivery system they chose. Totally inappropriate and detracted from their credibility and message. And the message is too important to be diminished by harangue or intolerance.

SDaniels April 27, 2:46 p.m.

"This kind of mentality can create more crime , because people got to eat."

Hey SpliffAdamz, why not smoke the legal stuff, then? It's much better, and you don't have a bloody drug war on your conscience, including that of sorry, desperate drug mules.

I'm glad to hear more of your views, because it seemed like "Amerikkkan" was rhyming too closely with "Farrakhan."

"In prison they make furniture , computers , even equipment for the military. Why you think amerikkka is always selling weapons and not buying them , it's because they got a cheap work force in prison."

You are goading me into researching stats on how many goods, and what type, are really prison-manufactured.

Guess I'd better put that spliff down and start googling.:)

lallaw April 27, 9:55 p.m.

SDaniels-You wrote: "I'm glad to hear more of your views, because it seemed like "Amerikkkan" was rhyming too closely with "Farrakhan."

Very cleverly put. :)

If you do find they make furniture, please let me know. I've been hoping to pick up a sectional for the family room.

SDaniels April 27, 11:17 p.m.

I'll get on it.

Looking for the "Palm Springs" style sectional myself; preferably with flamingo pattern or a meaty coral color.

JoshBoard April 28, 12:49 a.m.

I think they do make furniture. This table I got in my dining room has one leg shorter than the rest. I'm sure those prisoners made it, just to screw with us on the "outside".

Spliff...you're one of those guys that probably thinks nobody should have to pay taxes, aren't you?

I'm not sure why SD and lall even entertain your bizarre rants.

SpliffAdamz_ April 28, 8:44 a.m.

joshb-Only if our taxes goes to things that help the society we live in. Like education , health care , fixing or upgrading old bridges , fixing pave roads , fixing old buildings , building more schools then prisons , helping people get off drugs , helping homeless veterans get off the streets , educating the police force. Unfortunately our taxes don't get use in a way that is beneficial to society. So if my tax money is going to a politician's pocket , why pay taxes? We listen to you with half a brain , half the facts on issues and lame jokes , so don't have a baby!!!

Lallaw - I just can't trust a government that has had a history of scandals that has put everyone in this situation we are now in. I was raise to never put your faith in man/women because we can be easily influence to do good or bad. I thought the obama thing was cool , but he is still an amerikkkan politician so even obama can't be trusted. But to be truly honest , i think obama is president so blacks can't use the racist card anymore while there is still racism going on. What's the use in having a black president if the general population still has racist views. Most people focus on the fact there was a black man , and a women running for president and not the side issue. Like prop 2 on animal cruelty , which was only about how they house and treat the cows , chickens and pigs on the farms. Prop 2 didn't deal with your pet dog or cat , it only dealt with the animals we eat. Then obama pass the stem cell research that bush was always blocking. To me what the government is trying to do , is let people know that we are eating clone food. With all these fast food spots , grocery stores and schools serving chicken and hamburgers everyday smoething ain't real!!! Every MacDonald has on a sign that says "over a billion served". Shyt it ain't a billion cows , pigs , or chickens in the world to be serving a billion people every year!!! One day we as people will wake up , i just hope its sooner then later.

Sdaniels- i'm not muslim , but i do believe in god. I also think we are having all these problems because we put our faith in man , but we question the creator. When we really should be question man and putting our faith in the creator. So i'm not really for mota being legal. Because i know for a fact the government is going to tamper with it and i ain't trying to have the government mess with my medicine!!! The only people i see profiting from this drug war is the government. All the drugs the government confiscates goes right back into the streets , but through them so they make the profit. Then they put people behind bars to build up that cheap labor force. Damm my peoples is calling me time for a smoke break!!!!!!!!!!

cardig April 28, 4:23 p.m.

Lallaw and SD....You can get some furniture thru the Maryland Dept. of Corrections. Looks more like office furniture than for a house, and maybe limited to Govt. agencies.

Spiffy online catalog for your browsing pleasure....

http://www.dpscs.state.md.us/mce/Catalog-FY09.pdf

It does not look like there is a huge cottage industry of prison made products in the US.

I aslo found a Govt. website that said the US made it illegal to import ANYTHING made by foreign prisoners.

lallaw April 28, 4:38 p.m.

Very nice post cardig! THAT'S what I'm talking about...intelligent, helpful, reasonable dialogue. (Sprinkled with a little humor). Thank YOU cardig. :)

andrea1221 April 29, 9:46 p.m.

There are some power hungry officers out there but the same can be said with any profession really. I'm sure there are plenty that truly want to "protect and serve" or at least they did when they first became police officers. I can't imagine the things they have to face and see and put up with (although I can get an idea just from watching the real-life Cops on TV). These things would wear a person down and they'd become pretty jaded. I don't enjoy authority figures with power but you have to do what you have to do! If a cop pulls you over for speeding, be polite and respectful. There are things in life that suck and you just have to obey and respect police officers. The sad stories are when they abuse their power and when innocent people are targeted because of something like race. But if everyone remembers them as our "protectors" instead of the authority out to take our fun away, then overall attitude towards police officers would change for the better.

JoshBoard May 1, 3:27 p.m.

And, I'm not naive enough to think that officers are just these wonderful people, out to "protect and serve." Many of them are just doing it for a paycheck. But ya know what? So what! It's a job. A tough job, dealing with the scum of society many times.

I went out to my car the other day, and an African-American parking enforcement dude was putting a ticket on my car. I had only gone over the parking meter by two minutes, but I wasn't about to start yelling. It's my fault for running late. And he's not supposed to stand there, looking down Market Street to see if perhaps I'm on my way. So I don't yell at him, give him an evil stare, or anything. I took the ticket off my windshield, threw it on the ground, and drove away.

Okay, well...I threw it on the passenger seat.

And, I'm not going to tell someone that the meter maids need "real jobs" or that it was based on race, or anything else. I'm going to send in the $68 or whatever it is, and be done with it.

lallaw May 1, 11:11 p.m.

I took the ticket off my windshield, threw it on the ground, and drove away.--LOLOL...glad to see you're still in top form :) Badudump!

magicsfive May 1, 11:16 p.m.

lallaw...do you see u posted that at 11:11?

SDaniels May 1, 11:18 p.m.

Ok magics, spill it! What IS the meaning of 1:11?!!

magicsfive May 1, 11:30 p.m.

aww i know i'm driving you guys crazy with my 1111 obsession. the truth is, IDK. that's what i want to hear from other people (our readers, perhaps?), if they have ever had similar experiences. i know other people have, i have googled it and there is information, lots of it, but none of it makes sense to me. my questions are unanswered. EVERY DAY, without fail, i find myself looking at the clock, both a.m and p.m. and i mean EVERY DAY. i will just find myself looking at the clock at exactly 11:11. and it is not just the clock. the oven timer...i will look at it at 11 minutes 11 seconds. the equipment at the gym, 11:11, or 1,111 calories burned, or 11.11 miles on the bike. this is not just sometimes, its every day. and do you know what else i realized not to long ago? this has been happening for...wait for it...11 years. I am not making this up. even at night if i am already asleep before 11, i will turn over and happen to look at the clock at 11:11. Why does this happen? I know i'm not crazy. i want to know if anyone has this experience and if so what do they think about it! sorry this was so long.

magicsfive May 1, 11:43 p.m.

here are a few links, but they did nothing to explain it to me. maybe there is no explanation.

http://www.uri-geller.com/articles/11.htm

http://www.greatdreams.com/numbers/1111/1111.htm

http://infiniteplaythemovie.com/eleven_eleven_phenomena.aspx

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/41235

these are just some links that i picked at random. but the same thing happens for me. i am always drawn at exactly 11:11 whether i am concerned about the time or not lol...thoughts?

SDaniels May 2, 12:38 a.m.

SD's two cents: Before looking at your links, magics, Freud right up to current psychoanalysis would suggest that the number 1 has some kind of unexplored meaning for you. It could be related to an event corresponding to clock times you've mentioned--1:11 and/or 11:11, or it could be unrelated to time, and the clock just serves as a reminder. Many people have this thing where different odors, colors, scenes, etc. evoke sudden, persistent, long ago memories. Each time you notice this kind of synchronistic correspondence, it trains your mind to look for it again and again, and build up more and more significance--like working any muscle.

You'll have to forgive me for not checking out Uri "Spoon Bender" Geller. One of my 111 :) cousins believes in this stuff; apparently they use it in corporate "you can do it with teamwork!" seminars. Don't fall for that stuff! It is way more interesting to figure out what these things mean to you.

magicsfive May 2, 7:29 a.m.

hmm ok...lol maybe my psychoanalyst will give me some answers...i have an appt on monday! ;) no really though sd, thank you so much for your thoughts. I never heard of Uri (wtf) Geller, as i said i was just picking links at random. i feel kind of bad for getting this thread off track though you're probably the only one paying attention! xoxo

SDaniels May 2, 12:55 p.m.

Do you really have an appointment with a psychoanalyst, or is it a psychotherapist? I ask because with a psychoanalyst, you do not expect to feel better. It is an intellectual challenge to learn to "read" your thought traces and find recurrent narratives in them. Good old psychotherapists, counselors, and psychiatrists are the people most of us see, for talk, life solutions, and drugs to help with brain chemistry.

Police Officer Shootings

Comments

Sign in to comment

Or login with: