Police beat, taser mentally ill homeless man to death

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

It is no where near an established fact, but is merely an allegation being reported ad nauseum while established facts seem to be in short supply.

Well, this came from the article at dailymail.

When officers approached Thomas in the depot parking lot and tried to arrest him, he resisted.

As did this.

Fullerton police Sgt Andrew Goodrich said that Thomas began to fight officers as they tried to search him.

What is unclear is exactly what that resistence was.

It is most imprudent to assume that the Fullerton police officers involved in this incident actually had probable cause to make an arrest.

True, that information has not been released as of yet. My assumption was based off of the common knowledge that police usually, when responding to a call such as this, are lead to a suspect either by witnesses of the crime or a general description provided by a witness.

But, this was only an assumption and I could find no solid information on why the police were lead to attempt to detain or arrest the man.

reply to post by areyouserious2010

Well, this came from the article at dailymail.

Oh, I see. So if it is reported in the Dailymail then it is an "established fact"? Are you not aware of the fact that the news media reports false data? Hell, just a list of premature obituries alone should give you pause...but wait a minute! I just linked a Wikipedia article, didn't I? We all know what you will say to this, and ironically so at this point. Either way, it makes my point.

My assumption was based off of the common knowledge that police usually, when responding to a call such as this, are lead to a suspect either by witnesses of the crime or a general description provided by a witness.

And this is precisely why I took you to task to begin with. You were clearly judging and doing so based upon assumptions.

Good Lord, tasering is so yesterday.

Can't the police apply some "out of the box" thinking in their approach to abuse under color of authority?

How about tarring and feathering suspects? Now that's something you never see. Show me some videos of police officers in the act of tarring and feathering individuals and I might be more intrigued.

reply to post by Unity_99


Uhm yeah.... go back and read my post since you seemed to have misinterpreted what I said.

Originally posted by Thepreye

Originally posted by WhiskyKisses

Have you ever seen someone on a ton of PCP get angry?

Have you? PCP the great cover all myth.

let's not forget the guy was face down and handcuffed when he was murdered.

Rodney King was on PCP which is why that situation was an absolute disaster, as well as a media hatchet job on the police. We have all seen the famous Rodney King incident.. The problem is its not the entire video. It does not show all of the actions taken prior to the segment that was plastered on tv. It doesnt show the less than lethal means that were origoonally used. It doesnt show King throwing officers around like rag dolls. It doesnt show him respoonding to being "tased" (not the same as we know it now).



As far as dealing with one I have. It took about 12 people in the trauma room to subdue the individual long enough to to a conscious sedation. Pain compliance on PCP users is a myth and non existant. Fighting a person on PCP could very easily end up in a death because of the brain going mixed signal, which means law enforcement must continually "change the channel" to get any type of upper hand.

I am curious though as to what caused the the hands in to that degree.

@ the thread
As a side note the term resisting an arrest seems to be lost on some. If an officer tells a person that they are under arrest and to put their hands behind their back, and that person refuses, that is resisting an arrest. If you are arresting an individual and they flle from you, that is resisting an arrest.

A person who actively resists is not only resisting an arrest, but assault on emergency personnel as well (varies state to state).

Jus some more info for the thread.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Oh, I see. So if it is reported in the Dailymail then it is an "established fact"? Are you not aware of the fact that the news media reports false data? Hell, just a list of premature obituries alone should give you pause...but wait a minute! I just linked a Wikipedia article, didn't I? We all know what you will say to this, and ironically so at this point. Either way, it makes my point.

So then why believe the story really happened? Why believe the photograph is actually of the man and not photo shopped? Why believe anything that is contained in the news article?

I think maybe it is because you only challenge the integrity of the news story when it does not coincide with your argument and take it as fact when it does.

And this is precisely why I took you to task to begin with. You were clearly judging and doing so based upon assumptions.

The difference is you assumed that the police had the wrong man or had no reason to approach the now deceased man. I, on the other hand, assume that SOMETHING caused the officer's investigation to lead them to the now deceased man instead of just randomly picking someone and attempting to detain them.

So you would take me to task for it but then engage in the very behavior yourself? That is the definition of hyposcrisy.

reply to post by areyouserious2010

So then why believe the story really happened? Why believe the photograph is actually of the man and not photo shopped? Why believe anything that is contained in the news article?

Are you seriously suggesting that the Fullerton's police department's claim - as reported ad nauseum - that Mr. Thomas was resisting arrest is as believable the photograph of his badly beaten face? Seriously? With no video or pictures to support this contention that Mr. Thomas "resisted arrest", only an allegation, you now want to play this game without a hint of irony?

You're the guy who came in here and started demanding that people reserve judgment for when all the facts come out, and now you are insisting that an allegation is an established fact? You're a real piece of work, sport.

I think maybe it is because you only challenge the integrity of the news story when it does not coincide with your argument and take it as fact when it does.

You quite clearly challenge any reasonable suspicion of the Fullerton police officers who undeniably beat a man to death. This is the difference between you and I. You call for a presumption of innocence for the police officers who without question beat a man to death, but absolutely refuse to presume any innocence what-so-ever for a man who is now dead and incapable of defending his own reputations.

The difference is you assumed that the police had the wrong man or had no reason to approach the now deceased man. I, on the other hand, assume that SOMETHING caused the officer's investigation to lead them to the now deceased man instead of just randomly picking someone and attempting to detain them.

More lies from the hypocrite who willingly impeaches a dead man while defending police officers who undoubtedly beat the dead man to death. I have never asserted, contended, and certainly have not assumed that the Fullerton police officers had "the wrong man" when stopping Kelly Thomas and arresting him, I just haven't accepted as "established fact" that Kelly Thomas actually resisted arrest. Without the benefit of being there yourself, without the benefit of a trial where the fact finding is put to a much higher scrutiny than you're willing to use, you assume the Fullerton police are being honest when claiming that Kelly Thomas "resisted arrest" and again, absolutely refuse to give this dead man a presumption of innocence.

So you would take me to task for it but then engage in the very behavior yourself? That is the definition of hyposcrisy.

Uh-huh. I am confident that people reading this thread can make their own determinations on who is being hypocritical, disingenuous, flat out lying, and defending tyranny under the color of justice. I, in the end, have much more faith in people than you do.

reply to post by Xcathdra

@ the thread As a side note the term resisting an arrest seems to be lost on some. If an officer tells a person that they are under arrest and to put their hands behind their back, and that person refuses, that is resisting an arrest. If you are arresting an individual and they flle from you, that is resisting an arrest.

A person who actively resists is not only resisting an arrest, but assault on emergency personnel as well (varies state to state).

I do not think the judges and Justices who rendered the rulings I posted earlier are in any way confused as to what resisting an arrest means, and are certainly not at all confused on what it means to resist an UNLAWFUL ARREST. That point seems to be lost on you, friend.

Originally posted by areyouserious2010

The difference is you assumed that the police had the wrong man or had no reason to approach the now deceased man. I, on the other hand, assume that SOMETHING caused the officer's investigation to lead them to the now deceased man instead of just randomly picking someone and attempting to detain them.

Knock it off, you're only making it worse.. You can't defend the indefensible.

What this man did is completely irrelevant now, period, end of discussion... He could have been cuffed, and taken in following a few taser hits, in the end maybe he would have had some bruises and scratches, otherwise alive and fine, in custody, and few would have ever even known about it.

You cannot justify this kind of brutality and killing...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2866fd4f0cfb.jpg[/atsimg]

Not in this case, leave it be, let it go and let the law enforcement and justice system deal with it.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


Agrees with you 100%, wither this individual was resisting arrest or not, it does not justify, them beating and tassering this individual to death.

Those who are trying to justify these officers actions, LOOK at the picture of this individuals face and tell me that was justified. Listen to the witnesses statements, the anonymous caller who even said him self, 5 out of the 6 officers were still patrolling while the other was in sick leave. What the hell is up with that. Where is the video footage the police have a hold of this should be demanded by his father, to be shown.

Oh so what he was homeless, do members think it was acceptable? If you do then you seriously need your own brain examined. No one deserves this brutality.

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by Fractured.Facade

 

Oh so what he was homeless, do members think it was acceptable? If you do then you seriously need your own brain examined. No one deserves this brutality.

Of course it is unacceptable... That is the problem, those within law enforcement who propagate violence and attitude need to be dealt with... If they are going to police us, then they should treat us with a minimum of respect, yet they seem to view every American citizen as a potential enemy...

Thank god not all cops are bad, but enough are that we are rapidly approaching a tipping point.

Take this case for example...



This is the cops reaction...

www.dvorak.org...

William was charged with two misdemeanor counts; one for stopping in the roadway, and another for failing to inform officers of his weapons.

From the video:
“Right now, the # that you just pulled, I could blast you right in the mouth…I am so close to caving in you’re goddamn head…you’re just a stupid human being…People like you don’t deserve to move throughout public. Stupid idiot.” “I swear to God man this little bull crap you just pulled right now has got me so hot. You know what I should have done? I’ll tell you what I should have done. As soon as I saw your gun, I should have taken two steps back, pulled my Glock 40 and just put ten bullets in your ass and let you drop. And I wouldn’tve lost any sleep. And he would have been a nice witness as I executed you because you’re stupid.”

We're all just stupid human beings, maybe that is how cops see everyone, people who do something to get pulled over, don't deserve to move throughout public, and when possible need to be murdered?

What goes on at police training academies these days?

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


Nothing anyone says in here, can justify those pictures and the footage of what those officers did to that poor man,

His father was a sherrif too? How bad to those officers involved in this feel now I wonder.

I hope those officers are jailed for this.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade

If they are going to police us, then they should treat us with a minimum of respect, yet they seen every American citizen as an enemy...

I respectfully submit, that as the holders of the inherent political power, they should treat us with the utmost of respect. If they are in fear for their lives, perhaps they should consider taking on a job that doesn't bring them so much fear. If they haven't joined the force to uphold the law - The Supreme Law of the Land that demands respect for unalienable rights take precedent - then they are on the force for some other, far less noble reason.

That it ultimately took six police officers to kill this unarmed man does not bode well for their capabilities to actually arrest a person...lawfully or unlawfully. Their lack of expertise in the martial arts is woefully on display in the photograph of the beaten Mr. Thomas. The Fullerton Police Department's seeming indifference and meanness towards an unarmed homeless man is indicative of the police state in which we live.

On a side note. I was living in Fullerton years ago, walking late at night on a break from writing when I was pulled over by a very courteous police officer who felt compelled to frisk me, all the way down to checking out the little coin pocket on the top right hand pocket. Was he looking for a weapon in that little pocket? It is fairly presumed not.

At any rate, this was before I had opened up Pandora's priest class lawyer box, and I was annoyed at this presumption that it was perfectly all right to just detain me and frisk me in front of my neighbors. He was the first police officer to fall back on Terry v. Ohio, "informing" me that my problem was with the Supreme Court and not with him. As if the Supreme Court ordered him to pull me over and frisk me. Little did that police officer know that I would make the time to actually read Terry v. Ohio, and little do all the police officers who subsequently attempted to unlawfully detain me know that he was the impetus for my legal odyssey.

That police officer struck me as a good man, woefully misinformed. Indoctrinated by someone, and it is reasonably wondered if that indoctrination didn't come from his own police department...the Fullerton Police Department.

There is no doubt that every cop that got a blow in on this guy should be charged with murder, sent to trial, and if sentenced get exactly what any civilian would.

Can I post this link its relevant to this Case/death.

Kelly Thomas Beating

This is what I just read:

I’ve just heard from Mark Turgeon, an eye witness in the Kelly Thomas police beating death that he has NOT been contacted by the Orange County District Attorney’s office. You may remember that the District Attorney is supposed to be investigating the horrific incident.

Since the event happened almost three weeks ago, this is rather disturbing. This individual was immediately questioned by Fullerton police so there is no reason that the DA doesn’t have the ability to follow up with a crucial witness.

You may remember that the Coroner has already said that the cause of death is uncertain.

Wait a moment why not call one of the crucial witnesses, and why are tehy saying his death was uncertain? What are these people on?

reply to post by AnonymousFem


We live in an unjust world. Our entire system needs a reboot. There is so much work to be done.

reply to post by Nkinga


Is it me, or in cases like this does it seem like the UK press does a better job of bringing things out in the open than the American press?

Why should I have to find these things out from another nation's press?

Originally posted by kro32
Well hell what do we need courts for if we can judge things just by pictures. Let's fire the judges and the lawyers and just string these cops up cause we all know they are guilty and don't deserve to present their side or have a fair trial.

We've seen the pictures.

This man was executed by the police without any lawyer, trial, or judge involved at all. Since there is a full police report of why this happened to him, all you need to do is supply that one good reason the cops killed him without a trial.

Simple enough?

I will be holding my breath.

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
***Disclaimer***
I am reserving judgement on the incident at hand because there simply is not enough facts for one to pass judgement. Please do not accuse me of being a police apologist. I am merely presenting facts that may not be thought of before passing judgement.
***Disclaimer***

Fact 1. The cops beat the man to death.
Fact 2. Cops in the US do not have the right to execute a suspect in custody.

Any fact that excuses his DEATH is going to be one hell of a fact.

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
I am not being cold about this. It is unfortunate that this man lost his life no matter what the circumstances. All I am trying to point out is that we do not have enough information to pass judgement on the situation. If the investigation reveals wrongdoing by the police, then they should be dealt with harshly as I stated in my first post.

They murdered a guy.
How can that not be wrongdoing?
When is it acceptable for cops to murder anyone?
Under what circumstances is that not wrongdoing?

Yes, I used the word murder. 6 guys had a man restrained enough to continually assault him. He was down and not going anywhere and THEN he was beaten to death.

How that can be anything but wrong doing is going to be a fascinating post I am sure.