Discussion for article #237199
Yet… Buried behind the above news , , ,
LA Times Local - June 5, 2012 6:15 PM
LAPD finds officers were justified in fatal
shooting of mentally ill man, sources say
Los Angeles police Chief Charlie Beck and the Police Department’s independent watchdog have determined that two officers were justified in fatally shooting Ezell Ford, a mentally ill black man whose killing last year sparked protests and debate over the use of deadly force by police, according to sources with knowledge of the investigation.
Department investigators found evidence indicating that Ford had fought for control of one officer’s gun, bolstering claims the officers made after the shooting, said two sources who spoke on the condition that they not be identified because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the case.
–snip–
LAPD officials have never offered an explanation for why the officers stopped the 25-year-old Ford, but the sources said that the officers told investigators they decided to detain him because they believed Ford was trying to discard narcotics as he walked. The department has never publicly said whether narcotics were found.
–snip–
Ford’s death became a local rallying cry against killings by police, particularly those of black men. Ford, who had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, died two days after the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.
–snip–
As with all shootings, the commissioners will determine whether the officers’ decisions to draw their weapons and then use deadly force fell within department policies. The board also will rule on whether the tactics the officers used throughout the encounter were acceptable.
Beck, according to the sources, will recommend to the commission that the officers be cleared in all three categories, while Bustamante, whose office conducted its own investigation of the shooting, will recommend the board fault the officers for their tactics.
~OGD~
3 Likes
…adding that he felt the jury’s verdict was “based on emotion” rather than the necessary legal standard for conviction.
Code words for “there were a bunch of women on that jury!” Pig.
7 Likes
First thing I thought was "of course they find a WOMAN police officer guilty as cover for the male bully/murderer getting off Scot free. The woman officer deserved it, but SO DID the male.
3 Likes
There is no circumstance whatsoever in which it is acceptable for a police officer to kick any handcuffed suspect sitting in a patrol car.
Such violence is always excessive and unnecessary.
7 Likes
I don’t know what he’s on about with “the necessary legal standard for conviction”. They had an effing video of her repeatedly kicking a handcuffed woman. Even if she didn’t die, that’s still felony assault.
5 Likes
I’'m not very smart, but where is the justification for kicking the crap out of a HANDCUFFED detainee in the back of a patrol car? Takes real guts to do that - sorta like the cops who worked over Rodney King . . . or the poor soul in Baltimore, or the killers of Michael Brown or Eric Garner or Walter Scott. All those cops shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind their badges!
3 Likes
I’m a guy, and I’m sure as hell emotional about a handcuffed prisoner being abused, much less kicked repeatedly in the groin. What has that got to do with the legal standard for conviction? People have long despised defense attorneys for making statements like that. Don’t police officers see how the broad acceptance among them of this behavior poisons attitudes toward police in general?
“O’Callaghan’s attorney noted his client has an exemplary record, and no complaints against her have been upheld in her 19 years on the force.”
Anybody else notice that word “upheld” in that sentence? Which may simply mean, “no video of the prior abuse”.
3 Likes
Good catch.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t murder usually tacked on to a charge when someone dies as the result of a crime someone commits?
2 Likes