Phoenix Police Officer Executes/Murders Man (legal, bill, farm) - Arizona (AZ) - Page 2 - City-Data Forum

rjrcm · 10-07-2010, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0zac

The quote was taken from ABC15.com I believe, and is from the officer's sworn statement. He didn't add anything that wasn't already there. I'm not sure why so many of you think the police are lying and are just singling this guy out. If anything, I give the benefit of the doubt to the courageous officer who came forth with this information.

The OP only referred to the AZ republic article, which did not have a direct quote, and certaintly did not include "mother f*cker". I'm not saying the reporting officer is lying, and commend him for stepping forward. I have a problem with others making implications or statements not in the article, unless they have a source to back it up.

Edit: Yes, the abc15.com article had a quote "I don't need no warrant motherf***er."

twiggy · 10-07-2010, 10:04 AM

Officers are just people, they don't drink some kind of "supper moral juice" when they join the force, there for there are just as many cops that one should fear as there are in public. The majority of civilians are decent, as with the police, but there are criminals in both areas.
I don't expect any different treatment to an officer nor do I expect any different treatment to a civilian being suspected of a crime. If he is guilty then he deserves his punishment, if he is not, then he will get a taste of being wrongly accused, just like a civilian does. No difference really. They often attract people to the force who enjoy using force and weapons, it's no surprise that they have a few nuts in the bowl, but the majority are well meaning. Just like civilians.
With the "hero" mentality you're bound to get a few "villains". Stands to reason.

I don't know why people think civil servants are any different than the normal public, you know I've actually seen a paramedic tell someone to not "barf" in the back of their ambulance before on the way to the emergency room, like they could help it or they were doing it on purpose. I was shocked at the treatment, but like I said, it's the same ratio as the real world, there is no magic moral potion for civil servants.

observer53 · 10-07-2010, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twiggy

Officers are just people, they don't drink some kind of "supper moral juice" when they join the force, there for there are just as many cops that one should fear as there are in public. The majority of civilians are decent, as with the police, but there are criminals in both areas.
I don't expect any different treatment to an officer nor do I expect any different treatment to a civilian being suspected of a crime. If he is guilty then he deserves his punishment, if he is not, then he will get a taste of being wrongly accused, just like a civilian does. No difference really. They often attract people to the force who enjoy using force and weapons, it's no surprise that they have a few nuts in the bowl, but the majority are well meaning. Just like civilians.
With the "hero" mentality you're bound to get a few "villains". Stands to reason.

I don't know why people think civil servants are any different than the normal public, you know I've actually seen a paramedic tell someone to not "barf" in the back of their ambulance before on the way to the emergency room, like they could help it or they were doing it on purpose. I was shocked at the treatment, but like I said, it's the same ratio as the real world, there is no magic moral potion for civil servants.

Excellent post.

AksarbeN · 10-07-2010, 10:29 AM

^^ I can agree with your post “twiggy” and it was well said.

I would only add that civil servants are expected to reach a higher level of tolerance and character in the community they serve, citizens expect the “best of the best” when dealing with officers of a community.

Desertspiritsteve · 10-07-2010, 10:53 AM

The late Louis Rhodes lived in my neighborhood for many years. My mom liked him. Who wouldn't? He didn't drive. I would visit with him when I saw him walking. He told me that his house had been broken in to. He did not call the police because he didn't want them in his house. He quietly took his losses. He felt that once in your house, they could snoop and do whatever they pleased. The camel's nose under the edge of the tent. He wasn't a liberal by any means.

observer53 · 10-07-2010, 11:06 AM

For those who don't know, Louis Rhodes was the head of the Arizona branch of the ACLU for many years.

DellNec · 10-07-2010, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjrcm

You are implying more than was stated in the article, and added a quote that wasn't in it - where you there?

Wrong.

The quote, "I don't need a warrant, mother f*cker."
Is a sworn statement, in writing, given by the partner of the officer who shot and killed the victim.

Look it up, it is a fact.

The other problem is the officer is OUT ON BAIL and was ONLY charged with aggravated assault. The kicker is that the bail was posted by THE UNION. You have an out of control murdering maniac on the lose.

DellNec · 10-07-2010, 12:18 PM

[LEFT]Barbara Attard, a consultant who served as independent police auditor for excessive force cases in San Jose, gasped when portions of the initial report were read to her over the phone.

"There is a thin blue line, and officers are very reluctant to testify against other officers," Attard said. "I think it's going to be a different kind of case than you usually see."

Read more: Phoenix police officer in fatal shooting arrested[/LEFT]

sh9730 · 10-07-2010, 01:35 PM

I agree with many that there are serious questions here - but also agree that SOME of DellNecs comments are not accurate. The reports I have seen from several sources show that YES, the officer did point a gun at the suspects head and make some sort of threatening remark (the exact words are unimportant) and he was arrested for that charge of agg assault.

BUT BUT BUT, some of DNs posts make it sounds like THIS is when the suspect was shot. THIS IS NOT TRUE. There was a continuing altercation AFTER the gun pointing incident and THAT is when the fatal shot was fired. The actual shooting MAY have been justified given the exact circumstances at THAT moment (though I have MANY MANY questions and I come from LE background). They will have an opportunity to visit the case in more detail and it is VERY possible that further charges (state OR federal) will be filed. This is all in addtional to the absolute certainty of a civil lawsuit against the officer and the city.

I also agree with many that to paint with a broad brush in ANY direction is bad. Very few officers are horribly bad, just as not every hispanic in AZ is illegal and a criminal.

twiggy · 10-07-2010, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AksarbeN

^^ I can agree with your post “twiggy” and it was well said.

I would only add that civil servants are expected to reach a higher level of tolerance and character in the community they serve, citizens expect the “best of the best” when dealing with officers of a community.

I know, they do, but why? They can't realistically give more than a regular citizen. They are just a regular citizen with the right to enforce the law.
I don't expect more from the milk man, he was just trained to deliver my milk but it doesn't make him more likely to smile that milky smile at me or anything. He could just as likely be a freak that would one day poison my milk, who knows whats under the hood if you know what I'm saying. lol