Tonight, residents of hurricane-ravaged New Orleans, La., can rest a little easier, now that seven dangerous men indicted for murder and attempted murder are off the streets and in jail.
On September 4, 2005, just days after floodwaters drowned most of the city, Ronald Madison and his older brother Lance were crossing the Danziger Bridge, trying to get to a relative’s dental office, when a group of teenagers came up the bridge behind them and started shooting. The two brothers started running away, when a rental truck showed up, several unidentified men jumped out of it, and shot at them.
Ronald was killed, and Lance found himself on the ground with several guns in his face. The gunmen turned out to be police.
The official police report said that Ronald had reached into his waistband and turned around toward the police, as if he had a gun, and people would have believed this lie, since the coroner didn’t want to release the autopsy report. As it turns out, the reason was that the autopsy showed that police shot Ronald in the back. Five times.
Later the police would claim that they had guns but threw them away, but no guns were ever found.
That was enough for the district attorney to investigate, and last week, a grand jury indicted seven New Orleans police officers on charges of murder and attempted murder, charges the officers’ attorneys strongly deny.
“We cannot allow our police officers to shoot and kill our citizens without justification like rabid dogs,” District Attorney Eddie Jordan said. . . .
Police Superintendent Warren Riley called Jordan’s comments “highly unprofessional, highly prejudicial and highly undignified” and urged the community to withhold judgment until a jury decides their guilt or innocence.
“We want justice first and foremost,” Riley said, “but for the district attorney to try and prejudice the community against these officers before all the evidence is heard is really, I think, a sad day for the city.” — Associated Press
Two weeks ago, Kasimir Gaston, the only known eyewitness to the shooting, came forward and said that the two brothers were running away from the shooting when police officers lined up “like at a firing range” and shot him in the back.
Gaston was one of many flood refugees living on the second floor of the Friendly Inn, a low-income motel on the city’s east side. . . .
When asked if Madison had a gun, Gaston said, “I didn’t see any on him.”
CNN has visited the room where Gaston was staying. From that balcony, it is about 100 feet to where Madison was shot and killed. — CNN
The police even managed to put two bullets into Gaston’s truck.
The officers and the charges they face:
Sgt. Kenneth Bowen: one count of first-degree murder of Brissette and seven counts of attempted first-degree murder of Leonard Bartholomew, Susan Bartholomew, Lesha Bartholomew, Jose Holmes Jr., Lance Madison and Ronald Madison.
Sgt. Robert Gisevius: one count of first-degree murder of Brissette and two counts of attempted first-degree murder of the Madisons.
Officer Anthony Villavaso: one count of first-degree murder of Brissette and four counts of attempted first-degree murder of the Bartholomews and Holmes.
Officer Robert Faulcon: two counts of first-degree murder of Brissette and Ronald Madison and attempted first-degree murder of the Bartholomews and Holmes.
Officer Robert Barrios: four counts of attempted first-degree murder of the Bartholomews and Holmes.
Officer Michael Hunter: two counts of attempted first-degree murder of the Madisons.
Officer Ignatius Hills: one count of attempted second-degree murder of Leonard Bartholomew IV. — CNN
The officers turned themselves in today, and a crowd of supporters — supporters of crazed, cold-blooded killers — turned out to support them and wish them well.
One protester shouted “Police killings must stop” and “Racism must go” as the men arrived, but the protester was shouted down by the crowd yelling: “Heroes, Heroes.”
Uniformed police officers from nearby districts joined other supporters embracing the seven policemen and shaking their hands. The Fraternal Order of Police had encouraged rank-and-file officers to gather outside the jail to show their support. One sign in the crowd read, “Support the Danziger 7.” Another read: “Thanks for protecting our city.”
“These men stayed here to protect our city and protect us and this is the thanks that is given to them,” said Ryan Maher, 34, of New Orleans, who described himself as a civilian with friends in the police department.
“It’s a serious injustice,” said Sgt. Henry Kuhn of the Harahan Police Department, one of several uniformed officers from the New Orleans suburbs who joined the crowd. — Associated Press
Protecting the city does not mean shooting innocent people in the back as they try to get away from criminals with guns shooting at other people, covering up the autopsy report which showed that you killed somebody in cold blood, and saying God knows what to the only eyewitness to keep him quiet for over a year.
If that’s your idea of protecting the city, you probably belong in jail, too.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Bad Behavior has blocked 3286 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Oliver Crangle
Jan 02, 2007
Prediction: None of them will be convicted of any of the first degree murder/attempted murder charges and the maximum sentence any of them will receive if convicted of a lesser charge will be 5 years.
Cliff Claven
Jan 02, 2007
Alot of horrible things happened during katrina. What would the LEO’s motive be for shooting these people? Miscommunication would be my bet. Scared, confused cops cant effectivly protect the populace. I was under the impression one of the vics was mentally handicapped (excuse me please if that is a politically incorrect term) The LEO’s prob’lly gave verbal directives that were ignored, then scared officers fired guns. justice is needed, let 12 americans decide what happens, dont judge them from hearsay and rumors
Ev P.
Jan 02, 2007
Well, I would have to say that this issue seems very odd and strange. I would think that just because these officers have the law behind them does not mean that they should not be tried and convicted.
This is a good thing; why, because the officers are citizens of the US just as the rest of us on the street. These officers should be tried and convicted, mainly because they are here to protect the citizens. I do not think they acted in the best interest of the public at all. The officers and court officials would not hesitate to convict the criminals, so why not them?
Why is it that most comments in the media has to be racially biased or motivated, especially when there are “blacks†involved?
For the African-Americans; I do understand where you as a people are coming from, and most of you are doing well in the American society. I do not see much media on the Native Americans, or any other non-Caucasian nationalities. Therefore, maybe ceasing on this “racial†issue could stop once and for all.
Rodney King, back in (1991), has made a profound remark, which is,†Why can’t we all just get along here?†I think that statement is right on; and maybe we as Americans need to model ourselves to that remark.
Patriot
Jan 03, 2007
This is a great day for America. It is time we end the police state that we have come to live under. I live in a rural town and I can’t go on my front porch any time of day or night without seeing a police cruiser. It doesn’t make me feel safe at all. It makes me feel secure, but I don’t want to feel secure. I want to feel free.
Cops have gotten out of control and if we don’t put an end to i, we will lose our freedom.
Lenny Zimmermann
Jan 03, 2007
It was just a Grand Jury indictment, so when all is said and done the jury so far has only heard one side of the story. One of the Fraternal Order of Police, Employee Representatives wrote to the Time-Picayune about his views on the matter: http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/letterstoeditor/index.ssf?/base/news-8/116754831636810.xml&coll=1
Personally I wouldn’t doubt at all if the cops are very much at fault here. If for no other reasons then that the War on Drugs has heavily created an “us vs. them” mentality between both the police and lower classes in this region. Being poor and black only exacerbates that tension. Of course the constant reports of violence (most of which didn’t happen) that the news was reporting certainly didn’t help matters any.
It’s a pretty divisive issue here with many support the policemen involved, mainly just on principal of support for the law (or at least against poor blacks, sometimes it’s hard to tell where the attitude comes from with some folks). While others feel it was massively wrong for law enforcement to be blocking off any of the bridges around here, especially since those were some of the better routes for people to actually get away from the city on. (I’ve heard some people say that was a ridiculous assumption because “Where are the going to walk to, Baton Rouge?” But of course that is exactly what some people were doing, it’s just that some of these vehicle-dependent people simply could not conceive of someone actually walking those 70-80 miles, or at least trying to get that far and, thereby, helping themselves by getting into a better position to find someone to help them get out.)
In fact the bridge incidents were a common theme on many Mardi Gras floats last year (as were Blue Roofs, in reference to the blue tarps FEMA was putting up on all the damaged roofs.) For those unfamiliar with Mardi Gras parade “krewes”, each parade often has a particular theme and one historically significant method for satire and often scathing political commentary has been to have the theme and/or specific floats used to criticize politics and local events. Something we’ve been doing practically since the inception of New Orleans’ Mardi Gras. So despite my suggestions above about some folks around here with possibly racist or, at least, uncaring views it’s certainly not something that was missed by many locals who have been very, very critical of the police involved in this incident.
Joe
Jan 03, 2007
Come down here Jesus!
SK
Jan 03, 2007
I realize that you are only going by what you hear in the media which makes the latter half of your website name appropriate, but Ronald Madison was NOT shot 7 times, 5 times in the back, it was ONE shot from a shotgun using buckshot and 5 pellets hit him in the back. Eddie Jordan, our RACISTS distrist attorney only released the information to the media that suited him. Also, our RACISTS district attorney only allowed the grand jury to hear one side of the story. And yes, Eddie Jordan IS a RACISTS and I can say that because he was found guilty in a court of law for actions conducted toward employees NOT OF HIS COLOR. Unlike these 7 police who have already been convicted in the court of public opinion. By the way, neither you NOR our RACISTS district attorney were in the city during the storm. Every single one of these men have families who were separated from them for 3 weeks or more. Most of these men lost everything in the storm. It’s easy to sit back in your comfy little home calling people you don’t even know “crazed, cold blooded killers”, but law enforcement officers have just seconds, sometimes less, to react, whereas people like you have a lifetime to criticize.
Michael Hampton
Jan 03, 2007
Oh, they only shot him once in the back! That makes it all right, because we all know police can shoot anybody they want in the back, as long as they only do it once.
You’re only fooling yourself.
SK
Jan 03, 2007
And you “read” (that media thing again) shot in the back and not knowing the details automatically assume that they are cold blooded killers, I guess I would ask first, was it dead center in the back, was it on his side AND back…hmmmm…let me think maybe he realized he was outgunned and turned to run because out of the 7 pellets in a shot gun round only 5 hit him in the back. I know you think I’m trying to justify shooting in the back but I’m not, I’m just trying to make a point. What is it that you DON’T KNOW. What is it that they are NOT TELLING YOU. ASK QUESTIONS BUT MOST OF ALL REMAIN NEUTRAL UNTIL YOU HAVE FACTS. Why didn’t our RACIST DA allow the homicide detectives to testify in the Grand Jury? Why didn’t our RACIST DA tell the members of the Grand Jury Ronald Madison was shot 7 times in the back when he knows that is just a half truth? Why did the ONLY people he let testify in the Grand Jury was the so called “witnesses”?? People who can’t identify a drive by shooter when it’s their own relative gunned down in front of their house but apparently saw everything that happened that day, that hour, that minute, that second, on the Danziger Bridge. You know why, because he is the DA and he can do that. He can do that to get what he wants. In his world the end justifies the means regardless that it is only half truths. Remember, innocent until proven guilty applies to everyone. I sure hope you never end up in court. You better hope for a jury that has a more open mind than you do. And I repeat what I said before, I really don’t think you have any idea what was happening in this city during and immediately after the storm. I completely agree that innocent people should not be the victims of anyone but I’m sure the NOPD officer that was shot in the head responding to a call from a gas station didn’t expect to be gunned down in the parking lot. I’m sure that the officer who had heard that his whole family drowned in the flood waters didn’t think he was going to commit suicide that day either after working 72 hours straight rescuing people while his family died because that was his job. I’m sure the officer that walked into a church and told his commander he couldn’t take it anymore, the dead bodies, the people shooting at them, the complete chaos that they could no longer control, I’m sure his family, who had evacuated so they could be safe did not think for once that they would get a call that their son, husband, father also committed suicide. I’m sure that all the men and women who dedicated their lives, who dragged decomposing bodies out of houses so they could be picked up for their families, who were subjected to brutality by the citizens because the citizens that were too stupid to evacuate when told a Cat 5 hurricane was heading this way, felt the police force of under 1000 should be able to take care of the needs of well over 100,000 people. I’m sure they didn’t mind that they couldn’t light up a cigarette or go outside from where they were because shots were being fired at them from the tops of buildings and parking garages. It would sound like fireworks if anyone was crazy enough to venture outside. I’m sure that the 70 NOPD officers that were assigned to the 30,000+ people in the superdome are ok with watching rapes, murders, drug deals, intimidation by gangs amond other horrendous crimes. I’m sure that you would probably take the side of the rapist that almost killed a small child he was raping when the police stopped him and distributed some street justice. They could have killed him, but they didn’t, they handcuffed him and brought him to a holding area. I’m sure the national guardsmen is ok with getting his weapon taken away from him and shot by a group of thugs in the superdome. I’m sure that the police were ok with standing by and watching the people that remained behind, some for medical reasons, most for nothing but no good, I’m sure they were ok that so many small businesses were looted so bad that even insurance wouldn’t make them whole again. That so many families would be ruined because of greed. Who needs a big screen TV in 8 ft of flood waters and no electricity. And today, I’m sure the undermanned police departments of all the surrounding areas are just ok to stand by and watch as the crime rate goes up 143% because good people are leaving and criminals are coming back or have never left. That’s what we are living with now. Our population is still short over 250,000 people but yet the low life criminals and thugs have found their way back. Imagine if you can, flood waters that don’t recede for 4 + weeks. Imagine you are the one assigned to searching for dead bodies, men, women, children, babies, pets still tied up, dead from drowning, no food, no water. Our memories are of the NOPD and National Guard carrying a dying elderly gentlemen from his home who had no food or water for 3 weeks, he was 70 lbs when they found him, skin and bones and died not hours later in the police officers arms. Imaging being the one who is flagged down by a resident of a senior living home and going in and finding 20 of the residents dead still in their wheel chairs, not from flood waters but because the electricity went out and so did their water, food and all hopes of survival. These things I tell you are only the tip of the iceberg. If you listen to the media, all is fine and back to normal in New Orleans! What because the French Quarter is open?!!! Those merchants are fighting for their livelihood. They are slowly going out of business.
No son, YOU are fooling yourself if you truly believe this is so cut and dry and black and white because that is what you either read, watched or was told happened through the media. Step back off your high horse for a moment and maybe if you look at the world at eye level you will see that there are good & bad people in all professions…..doctors, lawyers, teachers, priests and every other profession in the world including whatever it is you do. I know that I’m not going to change who you are, because reading your blog shows me that your beliefs are to the bone and that is ashame. I invite you down to New Orleans to see that over 16 months later New Orleans and the surrounding areas are no better off than on August 30th, 2005. There is not one person here that has not lost something or someone due to Katrina. How dare you pass judgements on something you know nothing about. You have issues that go way deeper than anyone can help you with. How sorry for you.
These men responded to a call for help from members of the Corps of Engineers that were being fired upon. They responded to a call for help. They DID NOT go there to murder anyone, they responded to a call for help. Something that you were very lucky to get if you were a first responder in trouble. There were no best of times here, they were all the worst, worse beyond your imagination, worse beyond what the media wants you to believe.
forstand
Jan 04, 2007
SK,
Are you a cop, judge, prosecutor, DA? Why are you prejudiced in favor of these cops?
These cops may not be cold-blooded killers but it appears that they made a major mistake and have to answer to it. They should have been professionals but it appears that they were far from it.
I am 58 and remember my younger years with the police treating me like crap. I do not do and never have done drugs but my long hair and beard made me a target as if I did do drugs. I was not a violent person then but don’t push me now. I shoot for the head and am an excellent shot with my .45. Or my 9mm and numerous .22 hand guns. It is hard to miss with my 12 ga or my 30.06s. I have enough guns and ammo to start a war and finish it as well. 30.06 accelerators are very hard to do a ballistics on as the .223 bullet never touches the barrel (and very accurate to 500 meters). Great assassination round. The Brady group missed this one; they are so stupid.
So these cops should have nothing to fear if they are not guilty but if they are guilty then they need to pay for their carelessness or stupidity or fear or excitement. We do not need bullies or idiots with guns on the street and people like SK ready to defend them no matter what they have done.
I have worked with cops. One told me that a good cop could hang Jesus again (by planting evidence if necessary). Another carried a “throw-away” gun to plant on someone if needed. My experience is sufficient to make me suspicious of all cops (police when I am not pissed). I have had cops lie on the witness stand and have had the judge find me guilty in spite of testimony and California vs Agnew for a violation of my right to a speedy trial. That same judge in pure spite issued a warrant for me for failure to appear on a very minor traffic ticket just because I demanded a trial and showed one of two CHP officers was lying. I did ultimately win the case in spite of the asshole judge. You get just as much justice as you can afford or can fight for.
Even though I live in California again now, I do have a Concealed Carry Permit from another state. I will try to get California’s lobotomized version here. But will I use my hand gun to back up a cop in trouble? Maybe, maybe not. I am under absolutely no obligation to do so. I am a Life Member of the VFW which means I served in a combat war zone. So the cops reading this ought to consider the crap that they create with their bully tactics. I may be the one that can save their life. Do they want me to support them with my laser-aimed .45 or simply walk away? It is their choice. But I will not defend cops blindly.
I have a LONG memory.
Dem People
Jan 05, 2007
I’m sick of all you liberal pussies, complaining the police this..the police that.. If you weren’t criminals or defense attorneys, you wouldn’t care. So we know the criminals want freedom the attorneys want the criminals’ money, it’s very convienant.
Maybe one day a drug crazed heroin addict will brutally attack, rape and/or kill somone you love and you will probalby say where were the police? Maybe they were in court defending their actions for arresting or having to shoot a criminal who had no regard for human life.
If you would truly like to feel entitled to bash the police, then you should grow some balls and walk in our shoes for a while. Until then just sleep safe and secure at night knowing the police were watching over your city!
SK
Jan 05, 2007
forstand,
Just two things…1) why are you prejudiced against? Don’t answer, that’s pretty apparent from your post, and 2) appearances can be deceiving especially when you are getting your information from a liberal media and RACIST DA whose only claim to fame is convicting Edwin Edwards and being found guilty himself of being a RACIST.
All of you who have already convicted these men are basing your decision on your imbedded hatred and distrust of police and yet you are believing without question a crooked DA, who, in my opinion can do more harm to an innocent citizen than a cop, and a media who is reporting exactly what the DA gives them to report and a grand jury that based their opinion on one sided testimony and half truths.
How interesting. By the way, our RACIST DA has YET to bring anyone to trial on crimes committed before or after Katrina. And even criminals guilty of murder committed during a drive by are NOT charged with 1st degree murder. Which to me seems very much so to be pre-meditated. Again, how interesting.
forstand
Jan 05, 2007
Ah, SK,
here’s my response to 1): Define prejudice. Can prejudice be negative or positive? To me you are prejudiced in favor of these cops whereas I am prejudiced against them. It is a matter of perspective. Commonly prejudice is an unfavorable action or reaction but dictionary.com shows: “to affect with a prejudice, either favorable or unfavorable: His honesty and sincerity prejudiced us in his favor.” On the other hand: “an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.”
Pit bulls are known to bite and kill people. I am prejudiced against pit bulls because of their demonstrated behavior. I am certain that there are some ‘good’ pit bulls; nevertheless I stay well away from the breed. A pit bull breeder/owner is prejudiced in favor of the breed.
I have been on the receiving end of cop crap and judges who ignore the facts and the law. BTW, I have NO criminal record and my brushes with the law are mere traffic citations, nothing more. I had to pass a FBI background check to get my Concealed Carry Permit. Could you pass such a check? See, by simply asking you this question other readers could wonder if you might have a criminal record so therefore create prejudice in a reader’s mind.
Yes, I have met some good police and judges. But will I trust all cops or judges? Absolutely not. Will I give them unquestioning support? Hell, NO! Will I provide backup or support for them? It depends on my mood that day. So, yes, I am prejudiced in regards to our legal system and cops in that I do not and will not trust them 100%. My prejudice is based on my personal experience.
By the way just how are you associated with these 7 defendents? Are you a cop? A New Orleans business owner? I was surprised to learn a few minutes ago that all were released on bond and could return to work if certain conditions were met. NBC news just reported that some are saying this trial will give New Orleans bad publicity and slow its economic recovery; by implication New Orleans should drop all charges because it may cost them some tourist trade and money. The same news article dwelled on how violent New Orleans has become; again the implication is that cops are justified in deadly force to intimidate law breakers. Is this the liberal press at work? I don’t think so.
Prejudice can range from passive indifference to active prosecution including violence or intimidation. It also can be active support or defense. Everybody has some prejudice. Yours appears to be a prejudice against me because I will not defend these cops blindly. This is why we have a trial by jury system.
A friend of my Dad’s was called to jury duty. The defendent’s attorney asked, “Could you be fair and impartial just because the defendent was arrested.” His response got him a quick release from jury duty: “If the officer arrested him then the defendent must be guilty.” So here we have a case where two men were killed in a hail of bullets. Are we supposed to say: “Geeze, if the cops shot and killed these men then the men must have been doing something wrong.”
If cops want my respect and support then it must be earned, not demanded. When cops protect each other via the “blue shield” then they should not expect citizens to trust them. They are getting a reputation like that of pit bulls. If they cannot police themselves then they earn my prejudice.
And I am proud of my prejudice if you want to label it as such. I will always “Question Authority.”
My apologies for a long diatribe.
forstand
Jan 05, 2007
SK,
Another thought occurred to me regarding police conduct. The Air Force Academy Honor Code: “We will not lie, steal or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does.”
All police and members of the legal system should have the same honor code. No more “blue shield” to protect each other from prosecution for misconduct. Until they do I am prejudiced against them.
SK
Jan 05, 2007
forstand,
Let me say first of all law enforcement do have a code of honor and ethics. And although you probably have not seen it first hand and won’t believe me anyway, I have. I have seen good cops turn in bad cops. Secondly, it is not my intention to change your mind but to simply point out that your views and that of others on this blog are slanted and biased. You are unhappy about being judged for your looks yet you judge these 7 men based on partial information obtained through the media. You distrust all law enforcement yet you believe what is told to you by the N.O. District Attorney again via the media. We have had 8 murders in 5 days in New Orleans yet the very same DA that managed to get 1st degree indictments against 7 law abiding men doing their jobs has not brought but 4 cases before a grand jury since Katrina. And yes I can say law abiding because not one of these men have a criminal record or have ever had a citizen complaint against them in their years with NOPD. Not that it matters to you but one has a law degree and one has served his country. I really don’t care what you feel about police, nor how many weapons you have or if you’ve been harassed in your younger years by cops just like you don’t seem to care that there may just be another side to the story. In your mind, they are cops, they must be guilty. And maybe, just maybe, you have never met a good cop because you have a tendency to gravitate toward the bad ones. And the sad part is, I think that is how you like it. It vindicates your beliefs. What else can anyone say.
Dem People
Jan 06, 2007
Hey “Ruby Ridge” Forstand,
We as police officers don’t need your respect or support. It’s apparent, you have issues with government authority, be it police or military. Obviously the military has screwed up you mind. They say the military sometimes does that, but I think it only effects the weak minded. If you distrust and dislike the police so much, the next time you are victimized by a criminal, don’t call us, call you attorney! I’ve known people like you, one day you’ll snap because you had a bad day or week and take it out on someone else. You’ll lose control and we will be there to remind you that you are a human being too!
Dem People
Jan 06, 2007
SUPPORT THE DANZIGER HEROES!!!!!!
YENY WOODS
Jan 06, 2007
I KNOW FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, MY HUSBAND IS IN THE AIR NATIONAL GAURD, AND HE WAS ASSIGNED TO THE SUPERDOME. THINGS WEREN’T EASY AT ALL. ALOT OF PEOPLE WERE OUT OF CONTROL, AND AND FOR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BE PUT IN A POSITION LIKE THAT, I KNOW THEY HAD TO BE SCARED OUT OF THEIR MIND. NOT ONLY FOR THEMSELVES, BUT FOR THEIR FAMILIES. THEY WERE OUT THERE TO HELP, AND PUTTING THERE LIFE ON THE LINE, BUT YET YOU WANT TO CALL THEM CRIMINALS? OH AND ANOTHER THING, DON’T MAKE THIS A RACIAL ISSUE, BECAUSE CLEARLY ITS NOT, A RELATIVE OF MINE IS PART OF THE DANZIGER 7, AND TRUST ME HE IS NOT WHITE… YOU TRY TO MAKE IT A RACIAL ISSUE SO YOU CAN HAVE SOMETHING TO STAND ON…OTHERWISE WHAT CAN YOU SAY? JUST LEAVE OUR HEROES ALONE, AND IF YOU DON’T HAVE ANYTHING GOOD TO SAY, DON’T SAY ANYTHING AT ALL!
Michael Hampton
Jan 06, 2007
I’m still waiting for someone to explain how shooting a bystander in the back is heroic.
SK
Jan 06, 2007
“Bystander”??? I guess you are just stuck on believing what the media says. You are such a misanthrope when it comes to law enforcement but are led like little lost sheep by a media that doesn’t tell the whole truth because it wouldn’t be a good story. So why bother asking, you wouldn’t understand, couldn’t understand and apparently don’t want to understand.
Dem People
Jan 06, 2007
Michael Hampton,
I have never known anyone to be a BYSTANDER during a horrific shootout. Do you think anyone would actually stand and watch a shootout in progress, I bet you wouldn’t. If anyone stuck around during the shootout, they were either police or criminals! These men are not being called heroes because two people died, they’re being called heroes because they acted selflessly in the face of danger, at a moments notice when there was time to be concerned for their own safety. They knew shots were being fired and still they responded quickly to stop the threat. They didn’t have the luxury, LIKE YOU DO, to sit and analyze the situation. The actions by the police officers were done out of instinct, similar to a person driving down a dark road when a deer jumps out in front of your vehicle. Would you have had time to react to the incident any better?
Michael Hampton
Jan 06, 2007
Good point. Most bystanders who find themselves in the vicinity of gunfire either hide if possible or run like hell.
forstand
Jan 06, 2007
Dem People,
Ruby Ridge was a black day for FBI stupidity and arrogance. Thanks for bringing up a supporting incident where a FBI sharpshooter shot an unarmed woman in the head. I am surprised you did not link me to Waco as well. What about Rodney King? Great code of ethics, yes?
Post 21 has you stating that you have never known anyone to be a BYSTANDER during a horrific shootout. What a stupid statement–I hope that you are not a cop and anywhere near me when shooting starts. I read your statement to mean that is is OK for the police to kill everybody in sight if there is any shooting because everybody is a participant in the shooting. What if someone is deaf or blind? Mentally retarded? Suffering from Alzheimer’s? Senile?
These two men were leaving the scene. The cops said so. They stated Ronald reached into his waist band and turned towards them. I suspect the autopsy has the buck shot channels to be perpendicular to Ronald’s back and not at an angle if he was turning back to face the cops. All of this will be explored at trial.
If it is OK for the cops to kill everybody in sight then I might be better off if I don’t call for the police. The Supreme Court says they do not need to respond. I would rather handle it myself than have trigger-happy cops around.
Dem People
Jan 07, 2007
Forstand,
Apparently I was correct in saying you have a problem with government authority. You idolize people who have huge gun collections (or arsenals) and who have displayed distain for government with violence. I was not there that day on the bridge but I know the officers who were and they are not the kind of officers who shoot people for sport, especially unarmed people. If they wanted to lie about the incident, they could have very easily walked away without saying a word which would have been easy to do during all the chaos. You misinterpreted my statement of someone sticking around during a shootout. For someone to be completely innocent during an incident like that, they would have to be severly mentally handi-capped and probably would have to have all of the ailments you mentioned above. And just as you stated, if they didn’t know well enough to run during a shootout, couldn’t it be possible they didn’t know well enough not to fire a gun at someone. If the police are confronted with an armed mentally retarded person, is it reasonable to try ascertain whether they were retarded before shooting? It wouldn’t because the officers could lose their lives or cause the death of someone else. The police officers didn’t KILL everyone in sight either. I do belive there are bad police officers out there, just like there are bad priests, doctors, etc. who abuse their authority but I think you are biased aginst police. Maybe you have a good reason to be, but if it’s just because you were harassed by some, you shouldn’t assume they’re all bad, most police officers are honest and do care about people. Police officers are human too, therefore they make human arrors. I don’t claim to know the facts of the inicdent, but I do know, nothing it was it seems, ever.
forstand
Jan 09, 2007
Dem People,
I made my points and will not belabor them. I believe that your responses tended to support that which I was saying; i.e., don’t trust the police implicitly. I make my statements to make a point, the same as you do. It is obviously in your interest to support the Danziger 7.
Insofar as my comment about backing up a police officer in his/her hour of need: I know that I likely will do so because it is my duty to do so. It would be bad karma not to do so. My point was that the police officers on the street need to understand that their actions today will have consequences years down the road as those who they bully grow up. Too many cops are bullies and that destroys the reputation of the rest of the police. And the support. Don’t even get me started on ‘Hangin’ judges of which I have met too many. I even told one in Eurka, CA, that he reminded me of Judge Roy Bean.
I have met some good police officers of all races and sexes. They are are in the majority but just barely according to my experience (about 60% good and 40% not so good). I had one Deputy Sheriff (‘Bud’ Taylor of Siskiyou County) ask me to drop charges against a fellow student who broke my nose at school so he could go into the army; I did so and the kid called and apologized for his actions. ‘Bud’s predecessor as Sheiff I would not give the time of day to. Remember this was 1962 and the kid likely went to Vietnam. This police officer was well-respected and I hope someone relays this to him. My family have always respected him even when he arrested my brother.
Never have I heard a police officer apologize for the actions of a bad cop. Rather they supported him/her in public. There needs to be more of: ‘We sinned, we suffered, we repented.’ The actions of one affect the reputition of all. All of you are going to be tarred by the brush of a few. It is unfortunate but true.
I have a lot of respect for Michael Hampton. So far I have no reason to believe this is a nom de plume (pen name) for him. Mine is a nom de plume. Cowardice perhaps. Or common sense. I have to fly frequently and do not need to make the TSA hit list. I am not that difficult to find for the police.
It is not easy at times to be a police officer and I acknowledge that. I have not yet heard of one being a coward in the face of a criminal (same for the fire department). Far too many are killed each year. They are held to a high standard to not be trigger happy nor to bully people. Most do respond to problems in a very professional manner. As I stated before I likely will support them in an hour of need because it is my duty to do so; today too many people do not understand the concept of duty.
There should not have been a cover up or even the appearence of one when a person is killed by the police. The internet is the fastest news system there is so it is important that people are not tried in the court of public opinion. There are wordsmiths who can distort the news to an amazing degree. I don’t know if the information about the “Danziger 7″ has been accurately reported or not. That is what our open court system is about; we don’t have any Star Chambers much as King George (Bush) would like to have. I know that if I was to serve on a jury I would do as honor dictates: Be honest and non-prejudical.
So I intend to lay thse posts to rest and not respond to any response you may have. I notice that Michael Hampton is now reviewing posts before they are posted: Michael, it’s about time. If I have gone beyond the boundaries of good manners then I deserve to be relegated to the ether and will not take offense to your actions now or in the future. Thanks for this opportunity for me to express my opinions as long as I do so with good manners. This topic has stirred up much interest and I applaud you for this. I have seen other’s views on this and this is good.
forstand
Jan 09, 2007
Follow up: Spelling errors are the result of my errors, no spell checker and fat fingers. My apologies.
Michael Hampton
Jan 09, 2007
As a general rule I don’t screen all comments, and I publish comments of even those who disagree with me. It’s only through an open and honest exchange of ideas that we can learn anything.
That said, I have some fairly aggressive spam filters, (because I have some fairly aggressive spammers and site vandals) and sometimes they catch people’s comments. When that happens I try to get them published as soon as possible.
Dem People
Jan 09, 2007
Forstand,
You have expressed yourself (last posting) eloquently. I took offense because I am a police officer and I do serve the people of my community fairly and without bias. I too have been known to complain about the government at times, but I am not a police officer to serve the government, I do it because I enjoy helping people and it’s damn fun at times. I respect your right to free speech, I only took offense because I know I am a hell of a good cop and I also am concerned about my friends.
So with this having been said, I too will no longer debate this issue as you have your beliefs and I have mine.
Texas_Ranger
Jan 15, 2007
I would like to say that after reading the debate over this issue as posted here, that there are valid points from both sides, both in support of these officers as well as against. I can also say that I have personal experience from all sides of the fence on the same sort of issues, I am a serious minded Christian male, a Citizen with great respect and admiration for the Constitution of this country, an honorably discharged ex-Air Force enlistee of fourteen years service, and I have served as a deputy sheriff and county jailer in my home town. With my experience in these areas I have seen both good and bad, and I would like to believe that I have always tried to serve on the side of good. I have always tried to perform all of my sworn duties with the utmost regard for the rights and wellbeing of others and the Constitution of this country and my respective state. But I have always felt and performed my duties with the mindset that an unlawful order, no matter who gives it, is an order to be disregarded, regardless of the repercussions.
It is because of my experience in these parts of my life that I have become a Constitutional activist and work diligently to protect the rights of myself and the people from both police and governmental encroachment upon our rights (especially upon our rights to keep and bear arms) and to prosecute government infractions against the Citizens of this country and in resistance to police and governmental encroachment that are in the process of violating those rights. I even support the use of appropriate and necessary force against these agencies when they are in the performance of constitutionally or statutorily unlawful acts.
The courts have ruled over and over that the police are not required to protect you, but the police seem to deem themselves as having an almost unlimited power in many areas of our country to violate you or your property without repercussions of any kind under the guise of “public service” and “doing their jobâ€. I have had police officers tell me with a straight face “I don’t have to know the law; I only have to enforce it”. How is that for an oxymoron statement? How do you enforce a law when you admittedly have absolutely no idea what it even says? The favorite answer seems to be “My superiors said I had to do this and to do it this way.” They have become like automatons, too many robots with too little self-awareness and too little personal responsibility for their actions. I believe this may be the type of thing that motivates, at least in part, Forstands beliefs and actions, and in many ways I would absolutely agree with him based on MY personal experience.
That being said and having personally served in these capacities in many of the same types of situations as the police officers in the pertinent discussion, it is my personal experience that forms my opinion that in today’s society, many police officers are far too reactionary in pursuit of their “duties”. With our society in the state that it is in these days I feel that the policemen allow their “survival instinct” to kick in ahead of their judgment far too easily in potentially dangerous situations. In my opinion the most dangerous person you will ever encounter is a policeman who states “in these situations you don’t have time to think”! Personally, I find this neither comforting nor a justification for the potential harm to life, limb and property that is often the result of this type of thinking. It is one thing to take action because of an immediate known threat, and quite another to react out of fear or an assumption of a particular situation.
Police agencies these days have very aptly earned the reputation for being bullies because of the manner in which they exercise authority, at least as far as things go in my home town and the many cities and towns through which I have traveled in our nation. At home I have dubbed them the “Nacogdoches Nazi Force” because they believe they can say or do anything to anyone they desire. Everything is a “law” if they wish to harass you about something, even when no such “law” exists; they just make them up as they go along or completely and intentionally misstate or misapply them to give themselves an appearance of authority in a given situation. I have had first hand experience on both sides of that fence with police officers. If you happen to spend time educating yourself in the correct usage and application of even some of the laws in your home state (mine is Texas), as I have tried to do for many years now, you can readily see a great example of their less than stellar desire to know or care about the law or the rights of the Citizens they are supposed to “Serve and Protect”. You can show them right there in black-and-white that they are wrong and they will look at you like you have three heads and tell you that they simply do not care, they are going to do what their superiors have told them to do, regardless of how it conforms to the written law. The military works in much the same way but with a far more damaging potential to the accused because of the sometimes highly political nature of many subjects in the military judicial system. But even the military, in total contrast to law enforcement, may not initiate an attack on a possible aggressor UNLESS fired upon first; with the obvious exception of being deployed on an active battlefield.
I know the job of a police officer is often dangerous, but I would rather take the risk receiving harm to myself, a risk that I automatically assumed when I took the officers oath, rather than be guilty of harming an innocent because of a bad reaction or judgment; because that places the blame squarely on me and no one else. This is a personal responsibility I have found sorely lacking in the police officers of today. It is my experience that the majority of law enforcement individuals which I have encountered over the last few years truly do project an “us against THEM” attitude toward the general public. The ideal of “To Serve and Protect” has been turned on its proverbial ear to something more resembling “To Intimidate and Collect”, usually for whatever political entity by which they are employed, be it their township, city, county or state agencies. The people’s rights, ideals and liberties are the last thing that considered and the first thing cast aside by these bureaucratic enforcers. That is precisely the reason that I quit law enforcement and the Air Force, I refused to take part in the dismantling of our Constitutions for political and monetary gain of these entities and their private interests.
One point in this discussion that I have failed to see addressed as far as I can tell is that if this had been seven armed and well intentioned Citizens that had opened fire on a couple of suspected offenders, the police would be screaming that they should be tried and convicted as fast as possible to make an example out of them. This would be true EVEN if these Citizens HAD been shot at by the suspects and WERE simply defending themselves. No matter which point of view you are coming from, you know that in our “anti-gun” society today, this would be an almost absolute certainty. The police or some district attorney will almost invariably want to show “those people” that they cannot take the law into their own hands! Personally, in the hands of the Citizens is EXACTLY where I believe that it SHOULD reside, they certainly could not be doing any worse than the so-called “professional law enforcement” people have been. Not to mention that in all my years of life (43) I have yet to see a news story where a group of armored, military battle-clad, heavily armed Citizens has stormed a small home supposedly used by drug dealers and wound up shooting and killing a 92 year old woman that thought her home was being invaded by armed thugs and simply tried to defend herself. She died because the police informant gave the police the wrong address. So rather than obtain a warrant and investigate the matter BEFORE planning a military style raid, the police initiated an assault operation using a faulty warrant that should never have been allowed or issued without full knowledge and evidence of ALL the facts supporting an undeniable probable cause situation. This should have included the act of actually VISITING the residence to ascertain the validity of the informant’s statements.
I read in one of the above posts a statement that I took to pose a context along the lines of “since you don’t like the police then just wait until you need the police and then don’t bother screaming for them to help you, just suffer the consequencesâ€. And lo’ and behold, it appears to have been posted BY a law enforcement officer. News flash, it is a rare thing for a person to even have the opportunity to call the police in time to PREVENT a crime, the police are usually called AFTER the crime or sometimes while it is in progress. This also makes the a reactionary law enforcement agency that acts only “after the factâ€. And since the courts have ruled that the police do not actually have any legal responsibility to even show up, WHY would I waste precious time calling them if I was certain that my life was in danger? And still, they want us to all give up our guns and simply accept them as our sole protection. Sounds about as plausible as Jack and his beanstalk if you were to ask me.
As a Citizen, former law enforcement officer and military member, I have absolutely no problem with returning fire when fired upon, no matter what the source. But until that point, I have only my mind, my clarity of thought and action, and the desire to protect innocent bystanders and myself from harm to keep the situation from escalating into just such a scenario. In my humble opinion, news stories about an accidental police shooting should be few and far between, almost non-existent in fact, but certainly not an almost daily occurrence. To all the men and women in uniform that faithfully serve their oath of office in the truest sense of the oath, you have my everlasting thanks, admiration and gratitude. To those that wear it to only serve themselves and their political masters, of you I am deeply ashamed and reserve a special loathing of your kind. The rights of the Citizens and their protection from all enemies foreign and domestic is your foremost duty, even if that enemy takes the form of your superiors issuing unlawful orders and edicts. Learn the law you are expected to enforce and enforce it to the letter and under the intent with which it is written and contrast that meaning and intent with the meaning and intent of the Bill of Rights and our Constitution instead of blindly doing the bidding of those that care not for the true meaning and application of the law. The Constitution must ALWAYS win out over any legislative decree, it cannot be otherwise or the Constitution is meaningless. The only true purpose government and of law in America is to serve the people and protect their rights, lives and property above anything and everything, not those of government and it’s various agencies.
I am not posting here to place innocence or blame on these particular officers or on the people they are accused of harming. Without a full disclosure of the facts, that would be rather impetuous on my part. I simply wish to make my comments and experiences known for what value they may contain, if any, pertaining to this discussion utilizing a point of view that has truly seen all sides of similar proverbial coins. However, if the eyewitness account is proven true and accurate, that the officers “lined up behind the fleeing men like they were at a shooting range” and that the fleeing men had never fired a shot that neither the officers or anyone else witnessed, then this is surely a case of excessive force and homicide without any justification and the officers should be tried, convicted and treated like any other murderer that has been introduced into the prison system. IF they were fired upon or had actual eyewitnesses point out the two men as having been the ones doing the firing at other Citizens, then their actions are possibly justified up to a point, but to the point of shooting one of them in the back is debatable. If the man was turning and drawing a weapon as they stated, then the police by their own admission in the current statement of facts discussed were most assuredly already prepared to fire if a weapon was indeed produced and pointed at them, and only THEN should they have opened fire; but this action according to the currently stated facts did not happen, it appears to have been simply ASSUMED and they then opened fire. In my opinion this would not constitute self-defense as the statement so far shows that no weapon was actually observed nor found on either man, correct?
It matters not to me what the color or race of either the police officers or the suspects in this case are, only the facts as they may be proven in the instant case. But in my experience, it is an extremely rare occurrence that justifies use of lethal force in a situation where seven trained, experienced, and fully armed police officers have much to fear in regards to personal or public safety from two untrained, inexperienced, and apparently unarmed suspects running AWAY from them on foot…
7734
Jan 19, 2007
“Up here, in the “Mile-Hi City”, we just recovered from a Historic event—may I even say a “Weather Event” of “Biblical Proportions” — with a historic blizzard of up to 44″ inches of snow and winds to 90 MPH that broke trees in half, knocked down utility poles, stranded hundreds of motorists in lethal snow banks, closed ALL roads, isolated scores of communities and cut power to 10′s of thousands.
FYI: George Bush did not come. FEMA did nothing. No one howled for the government. No one blamed the government.
No one even uttered an expletive on TV. Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton did not visit. Our Mayor did not blame Bush or anyone else. Our Governor did not blame Bush or anyone else, either. CNN, ABC, CBS, FOX or NBC did not visit – or report on this category 5 snowstorm other than as just another weather NEWS story. Nobody demanded $2,000 debit cards. No one asked for a FEMA Trailer House. No one looted. Nobody – I mean Nobody demanded the government do something. Nobody expected the government to do anything, either. No Larry King, No Bill O’Rielly, No Oprah, No Chris Mathews and No Geraldo Rivera. No Shaun Penn, No Barbara Striesand, No Hollywood types to be found. Nope, we just melted the snow for water. Sent out caravans of SUV’s to pluck people out of snow engulfed cars. The truck drivers pulled people out of snow banks and didn’t ask for a
penny. Local restaurants made food and the police and fire departments delivered it to the snowbound families. Families took in the stranded people – total strangers.
We fired up wood stoves, broke out coal oil lanterns or Coleman lanterns. We put on extra layers of clothes because up here it is “Work or Die”. W e did not wait for some affirmative action government to get us out of a mess created by being immobilized by a welfare program that trades votes for ‘sittin at home’ checks. Even though a Category “5″ blizzard of this scale has never fallen this
early, we know it can happen and how to deal with it ourselves. “In my many travels, I have noticed that once one gets north of about 48 degrees North Latitude, 90% of the world’s social problems evaporate.” It does seem that way, at least to me.
Maybe SOME people will get the message. The world does Not owe you a living.”
Me Myself and Irene
Jan 26, 2007
First I would like to address “Texas Ranger”
I’m sure glad every police officer doesn’t share your beliefs, otherwise The United States would would be a third world country.
And 7734, first of all I fell for you, it sounds like “Katrina North” with a frozen flood. You’re absolutely right most of the people down here are useless human debris and would rather sit on their asses with no ambition or future as long as they can collect free money and housing and blame everyone but themselves. I envy you, its sounds like you live in a really great community. And by the way you’re better off, in my opinion, without Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson or the media.
Me Myself and Irene
Jan 26, 2007
Sorry , 7734 I meant “feel” for you.