Discussion: A Tale Of Two McKinney Cops, From A Former Police Officer

a cop is what you get when a bully turns pro.


Not really…people have been prosecuted for actions leading to someone else’s death. For instance, a person who purposefully uses the wrong equipment in a construction job and then people end up dead because of their work or a person who yells “fire” in a crowded theater which then results in the deaths of individuals who are trampled by others. There are examples of people being held responsible for the death of someone even if they did not pull the actual trigger, but rather, though their actions, caused the death of another.

He’s also been sued for excessive force. He’s also been disciplined for his racial animosity, from what I’ve read. So, basically, he’s a really bad cop they need to get rid of.


I can’t support that. What if the 911 caller didn’t know it was a fake gun? After all, it is the cops’ job to determine if there is a threat to public safety. It is the public’s job to report anything suspicious. All I know is that now that open carry is the law in Texas, I expect to be calling 911. Every person I see with a long-gun in Target, or anywhere really, is going to be visited by the cops to determine if they are a threat.


The cops were 100% wrong in the Rice shooting, no doubt about it. But indeed the 911 call was nuts, but I will say that the caller told the police operator that the gun might be a toy. That information should have been relayed to the cops also. But regardless, there is no blame on that to the operator, that was 100% the fault of the two cops. One for driving right up to the kid (if that was a real gun, the cop gets blown away), the other for just shooting so fast. You pull up about 50 feet away, get out of the car, crouch behind the door, and tell the person to drop the weapon.

1 Like

Look, this is all very well, but here’s the part that’s profoundly disturbing to me–and to everyone who watches the damn video and is disturbed by it–and yet almost no one seems to want to talk about..

He tells the girl to leave, so she leaves and he walks away. But for some reason, the way she’s leaving is unsatisfactory to him, so he runs after her, grabs her and throws her to the ground. I’m not going to say he went out of his way to make sure she made contact with the sidewalk instead of the grass, but he sure didn’t seem to go out of his way to prevent it. Then, after forcing her to sit, there’s apparently something about the way she’s sitting that is unsatisfactory, so first he screams “sit your ass down!” at her despite her having made no attempt not to continue sitting, and then, her failure to comply with his command to sit in a sufficiently submissive manner causes him to see an urgent need, perceptible apparently only to him, to lay hands on her some more–a lot more-wrestle with her, exert dominance and control over her.

It’s clear that there was some reason the asshole had picked her out of the crowd as someone to pay attention to, such that her continuing to talk got his attention from a distance the way no one else’s talking had. And it’s clear that there was some reason he felt the need to lay hands on her over and over again, pull her hair and force her into submission despite the fact that she was complying with his orders.

And it is perfectly goddamn clear to anyone who watches the video what that reason was and what it was about her that caused him to at least subconciously tag her for special attention!

That’s what makes those of us who feel ill watching it feel so ill. And yet, none of us want to discuss it because, gosh, it just seems over the line and over the top to suggest it, or accuse this guy of . . . um . . . gulp . . .

Plus we can’t even talk about it without using words like “young” and “nubile” or note that she, unlike most of the teen girls here, didn’t have a cover-up on (because, as Megyn told us, “she’s no saint!” Hussy had it coming, just like all hussies do!), words that make us feel icky and pervy, or guilty because they might represent an admission that we ourselves noticed the thing that he did, the thing that caused him to single out her, out of all the teens on the scene and all the teens leaving the scene at his command.

But for Christ’s sake, we all noticed. It’s clear as day. Maybe it wasn’t conscious, but no, it’s just not a coincidence that the testosterone poisoned amped up warrior goon tagged this girl, among all the teens there as one to keep an eye on for special treatment if she gave him the slightest excuse to do it.

That’s why we feel sick watching this video and that’s why we’re outraged, whether we want to articulate it or not. And, I fear, it’s the exact same thing that makes many of those who are defending him so strident and aggressive in their approval of his actions.


“he unholstered his firearm almost two seconds after those two young men began backing away from him”

Shall I put that all in caps for those of you who were arguing he was justified in pulling his weapon out?

“they must realize that the public—even a group of non-compliant teenagers—are not an enemy to be vanquished, but civilians to be protected, to the extent possible, from indignity and harm”

Yeah, well, the public needs to realize that for people like Casebolt, if the people he’s dealing with are black, then they ARE “an enemy to be vanquished” and who should be subjected to as much indignity and harm as is required to put them in their place.

While I commend the author for his correct thoughts, the fact that he neatly sidesteps the fact that this guy has been proven through his own Youtube page to be a jackass full of all kinds of race resentment is unacceptable. It can’t be ignored and it inextricably linked to the behavior we witnessed in the video.


Indeed. The hard part of course is that he is a Union Official, so they have to build the case properly. No knee jerk reactions, just build a case, present it, and fire his ass. To fire him now makes no sense, you need to go through the motions, Violate the Union Contract and he could walk.

1 Like

Quite true. There’s been this disturbing trend of [“swatting”][1] and it’s been a miracle that no one has been killed (at least not as far as I know). But this would be another example of someone who would be responsible for the death of another.
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting

I would bet my life’s savings that he uses the “guardian” approach (or closer to it) with the white folks. Frankly, that’s what he thought he was doing here anyway…guarding innocent white folks from ornery, disobedient, inherently dangerous black kids who clearly (from his mindset) didn’t belong in their nice white gated community pool, making Mama June cry.


Exactly. Can you imagine a more vulnerable position to be in than that, in public? And he took full advantage of his “authori-tah”.


He doesn’t side step it, it’s not the point of the article. He’s simply trying to analyze what we see and the different types of policing in the video.


I think the word “false” was misused there, yes. Obviously you prosecute someone who makes stuff up and calls 911 for fun, etc. In the Rice case, the caller did say it might be a toy gun. That info should have been relayed to the cops. And the problem here was that this was a perfect replica of a real gun, and the label indicating it was fake had been removed. I don’t blame the caller, it was not a “false” call. The Rice case was 100% the fault of the two cops.


It would be interesting to read about just how police academies screen applicants. What kind of psychological tests are in place? And what kind of stress tests are trainees subjected to? It seems that to do the job well – to protect and to serve the public – one would need some level of emotional intelligence. Instead, again and again, we are seeing dangerous bullies who have no business being armed and given authority over others. Those kids that Casebolt abused will now grow up hating police – as do many people who’ve experienced unjust encounters. This article is helpful to point out that it doesn’t need to be this way.


You also see two other cops come rushing up when Casebolt raises his gun, like “Whoa!” It was clear to me as a viewer that it was clear to them that the nutbar was completely out of control and dangerous. But then, that much is clear when he does that little action movie roll right at the beginning of the clip. What is he dodging? Teenage shade?


Why are people even still yammering about this straw man, red herring nonsense? They’re going to follow the process. It’s not even remotely an issue. The only people discussing this as though that’s an issue are doing so as a distraction and, apparently, some weird way of assuaging the need to defend the guy from something.


Blueberry is talking about the guy who called 911 in the Walmart shooting. The caller said the young black man was pointing a gun at people when the video from the story clearly shows him not doing that at all. He had picked up a pellet (bb?) gun from off the Walmart shelf and was talking on the phone. He wasn’t menacing or pointing it at anyone.

Or maybe I totally misread the previous comments. This new commenting system is a little bit to get used to…


He’s a union official? Boy, now there’s a fact not being widely covered. And of course he is. Because of course.

1 Like

Yes, I noticed that the first time I saw it. Like “wtf are you nuts???”. Thing is, that guy was their boss. And a Union Official.

1 Like

Maybe. I would say it really depends on who Casebolt views as an “enemy”. There is a tendency in law enforcement for officers to start viewing people through the lens of who “causes them the most trouble”. That’s not to say that Casebolt didn’t hold some inherent bigotry to begin with though.

Edit: With that said, it is bizarre that in the video Casebolt seems to take no issue with that guy in the shorts acting like a Barney Fife.

Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available