I'm more concerned about the daughter. After being repeatedly struck in the face by her mother, she watches as her dad is restrained, and then transported to the hospital where he dies. Mom receives a financial settlement from the City of Moore, runs off with a new boyfriend, and the daughter is left wondering what she did to deserve all of this.

based on information so far, not really seeing a settlement headed toward the mother in this scenario

ME rules a homicide...

Press conference at 5:15

Press conference at 5:15

From the ME's office? From the police? It should be from the DA's office to announce criminal charges. After hearing that man say, "I can't breathe" and the watch that unfold, obviously, they killed Mr. Rodriguez.

edit to add "...died from a cardiac arrhythmia brought on by physical restraint after he was handcuffed by Moore police outside the Warren Theatre in February. Medical Examiner spokeswoman Amy Elliot said the death has been classified as a homicide."

Now the question, was it criminal? Absolutely. I say manslaughter 1. The key word in the ME statement is "after."

From the police? It should be from the DA's office to announce criminal charges. After hearing that man say, "I can't breathe" and the watch that unfold, obviously, they killed Mr. Rodriguez.

I think you may be right.... If it's true, what a black eye for a police force that did so much good during the tornado.

I think you may be right.... If it's true, what a black eye for a police force that did so much good during the tornado.

Some cops think they are GOD and can do whatever they want. I hope they get more than a slap on the wrist. There are some good cops but some of these young guys coming out think they have more power than what they have.

From the ME's office? From the police? It should be from the DA's office to announce criminal charges. After hearing that man say, "I can't breathe" and the watch that unfold, obviously, they killed Mr. Rodriguez.

edit to add "...died from a cardiac arrhythmia brought on by physical restraint after he was handcuffed by Moore police outside the Warren Theatre in February. Medical Examiner spokeswoman Amy Elliot said the death has been classified as a homicide."

Now the question, was it criminal? Absolutely. I say manslaughter 1. The key word in the ME statement is "after."

I could see if he died from asphyxiation but cardiac arrest? Bet they hear that kind of thing all of time without anything happening but I do agree they went overboard with detaining an overweight guy in his 50's

Defense attorneys on ALL SIDES (for the family and cops) fully expected the ME to rule it a 'homicide.' There really wasn't any other obvious option. Problem is, the general public thinks 'homicide' means criminal act - which it doesn't.

This may better the chances in a civil court, but doesn't change my stance as regarding nothing criminal was done on the cops side. Had he not been obviously squaring off with police in the theater surveillance video, then I might think a bit differently. You square off with police and they can use a significant amount of force on you.

Defense attorneys on ALL SIDES (for the family and cops) fully expected the ME to rule it a 'homicide.' There really wasn't any other obvious option. Problem is, the general public thinks 'homicide' means criminal act - which it doesn't.

This may better the chances in a civil court, but doesn't change my stance as regarding nothing criminal was done on the cops side. Had he not been obviously squaring off with police in the theater surveillance video, then I might think a bit differently. You square off with police and they can use a significant amount of force on you.

So, not showing your papers receives the death penalty? On the spot? Welcome to the New America. We all say we abhor violence, but it's the cornerstone of our foreign policy, and domestically, it's becoming somehow accepted that if you get upset with the police and dare show any emotion you're taken down violently.

You know, there didn't have to be a scuffle that night. He was emotionally charged because of the problems between his wife and daughter. He was upset. These cops, decide not to de-escalate the situation but decided to "square off" as if he was a big threat - even after he was cuffed! They didn't care - they just LOVE using their muscle and any opportunity to "engage a suspect." They live off that crap. They salivate for times like that. The many that came from the Armed Forces aren't properly trained except as trained killers. Yes, that's what the military trains their people for. That's a fact. The transition is fraught with peril and nights like this one in Moore. I don't know if any of these guys were ex-military, but it wouldn't surprise me. They have NO BUSINESS transitioning from trained killers to law enforcement officers.

The older I get - the more radical I am getting.

These were uniformed thugs. Killers of Mr. Rodriquez. So, he was upset with the cops. Big deal. It used to be expected, now you can't show any emotion or they're ready for the "take-down." The new militaristic jackboots of government power in the New America.

Nobody cares about crime in the suites who steal millions. But this guy - who wasn't even doing anything but trying to settle both mom and daughter down - was zeroed in by the new SS.

These guys, whether they are "my neighbors" or "just like you and me" or not --- killed that man from an overdose of testosterone and a desire (need?) to throw their weight around.

Cops have the smartest ass mouths on them of any profession in the country - most are complete and total assholes. Not the other way around. It's not just a few spoiling the rest, it's most of them with only a few who see how corrupt and violent it is - and usually leave.

And we haven't even talked about the killers that pumped several bullets into a man threatening suicide the other day. They were told he had a gun to kill himself with. They go in (which they didn't have to do as nobody else was inside) when they should have called the county Mental Health Response Team. They see the guy with the gun (surprise, they were told he had one) and - boom! the guy is dead - a testosterone high for the thugs who were called to HELP THE MAN! ("Come out and quit talking suicide - or we're coming in and will kill you!") But, no, sitting in the driveway to wait for Mental Health Response is too boring. It doesn't match-up with these thugs DNA.

I can't believe this new generation of cops. Thugs with badges and weapons - and a blue wall of silence to protect them.

From the ME's office? From the police? It should be from the DA's office to announce criminal charges. After hearing that man say, "I can't breathe" and the watch that unfold, obviously, they killed Mr. Rodriguez.

edit to add "...died from a cardiac arrhythmia brought on by physical restraint after he was handcuffed by Moore police outside the Warren Theatre in February. Medical Examiner spokeswoman Amy Elliot said the death has been classified as a homicide."

Now the question, was it criminal? Absolutely. I say manslaughter 1. The key word in the ME statement is "after."It's murder. They need to be charged with murder.

So, not showing your papers receives the death penalty? On the spot? Welcome to the New America. We all say we abhor violence, but it's the cornerstone of our foreign policy, and domestically, it's becoming somehow accepted that if you get upset with the police and dare show any emotion you're taken down violently.

You know, there didn't have to be a scuffle that night. He was emotionally charged because of the problems between his wife and daughter. He was upset. These cops, decide not to de-escalate the situation but decided to "square off" as if he was a big threat - even after he was cuffed! They didn't care - they just LOVE using their muscle and any opportunity to "engage a suspect." They live off that crap. They salivate for times like that. The many that came from the Armed Forces aren't properly trained except as trained killers. Yes, that's what the military trains their people for. That's a fact. The transition is fraught with peril and nights like this one in Moore. I don't know if any of these guys were ex-military, but it wouldn't surprise me. They have NO BUSINESS transitioning from trained killers to law enforcement officers.

The older I get - the more radical I am getting.

These were uniformed thugs. Killers of Mr. Rodriquez. So, he was upset with the cops. Big deal. It used to be expected, now you can't show any emotion or they're ready for the "take-down." The new militaristic jackboots of government power in the New America.

Nobody cares about crime in the suites who steal millions. But this guy - who wasn't even doing anything but trying to settle both mom and daughter down - was zeroed in by the new SS.

These guys, whether they are "my neighbors" or "just like you and me" or not --- killed that man from an overdose of testosterone and a desire (need?) to throw their weight around.

Cops have the smartest ass mouths on them of any profession in the country - most are complete and total assholes. Not the other way around. It's not just a few spoiling the rest, it's most of them with only a few who see how corrupt and violent it is - and usually leave.

And we haven't even talked about the killers that pumped several bullets into a man threatening suicide the other day. They were told he had a gun to kill himself with. They go in (which they didn't have to do as nobody else was inside) when they should have called the county Mental Health Response Team. They see the guy with the gun (surprise, they were told he had one) and - boom! the guy is dead - a testosterone high for the thugs who were called to HELP THE MAN! ("Come out and quit talking suicide - or we're coming in and will kill you!") But, no, sitting in the driveway to wait for Mental Health Response is too boring. It doesn't match-up with these thugs DNA.

I can't believe this new generation of cops. Thugs with badges and weapons - and a blue wall of silence to protect them.



Trust me, I get the uproar from yourself and others that see the situation the way you do. And that's not a put-down. I can in fact see your perspective. I just have a different one and I think your examples are a bit over the top, but one certainly shared by others.

There are tons of examples where a person is killed at the hands of another that did not deserve 'the death penalty' - but that doesn't mean anything criminal took place by the responsible party.

Most of your rant however is really simply too much to even begin to address.

Everyone who knows me knows I have zero issues attributing my name to the fact I can't stand most law enforcement officers and I find OCPD administration a pathetic pool of self-serving dimwits. That said (and sticking to just this case), I see it as extremely unfortunate but still within the limits of the law. Armchair quarterbacking the event after the fact is only useful for possibly instituting different policies going forward.

To reduce this to "The man didn't show his papers and was killed for it on the spot" is an insult to both the citizen and police.

Personally, I think (in some ways) this case should be given over to a jury (and not a grand jury) so that at least the final footnote won't be that police and the DA's office covered this up. It will be that citizens viewed ALL the evidence and concluded nothing criminal took place.

Defense attorneys on ALL SIDES (for the family and cops) fully expected the ME to rule it a 'homicide.' There really wasn't any other obvious option. Problem is, the general public thinks 'homicide' means criminal act - which it doesn't. Had he not been obviously squaring off with police in the theater surveillance video, then I might think a bit differently. You square off with police and they can use a significant amount of force on you.

He took an aggressive stance, his bad. He made a supremely stupid decision and paid the price. Time to move on old news. Based upon the ME report he also had little concern for his own health so he contributed to his own demise in multiple manners. His age is a non issue. Regardless of age you become aggressive you are going to be put down hard. Get over it.

He took an aggressive stance, his bad. He made a supremely stupid decision and paid the price. Time to move on old news. Based upon the ME report he also had little concern for his own health so he contributed to his own demise in multiple manners. His age is a non issue. Regardless of age you become aggressive you are going to be put down hard. Get over it.

I'm not ready to go quite that route 'yet.' Its still topical and the decision not to criminally charge has not yet been made. If nothing else, this is a good example that police policy, police behavior and laws should reflect the will of the people. If society reviews this event and decides what was done may not have been criminal, but, no longer reflects the will of the people, then this is an opportunity to change those policies, behaviors, laws.

He took an aggressive stance, his bad. He made a supremely stupid decision and paid the price. Time to move on old news. Based upon the ME report he also had little concern for his own health so he contributed to his own demise in multiple manners. His age is a non issue. Regardless of age you become aggressive you are going to be put down hard. Get over it.

Even after you are cuffed? Of course, to you, cops can do no wrong.

"He took an aggressive stand, his bad." In other words, he was agitated, so the answer was the death penalty. Just because guys have a badge doesn't mean a man being confronted can't be upset. Emotions don't turn on and off like that. I don't expect you to understand that though. The cops are always right - even when they are the criminals.

Still quite a few very bold conclusions on this thread, given the fact that the investigation hasn't been completed, much less a determination by the DA or any other prosecuting authority. Watching "ER" episodes and knowing some doctors doesn't make me qualified to give medical advice. This is without question a tragic incident with criminal responsibility yet to be determined, but to indict an entire profession in the court of public opinion sure seems disproportionate.

Cops will always stick together ,it's a brotherhood. To think that anyone of us could be killed in front of our family just for backing up to a cop in mind blowing. This new breed of cop is hopped up on steroids and suffers from PTSD and you better not make the mistake of saying or doing something they don't like or you will pay for it. I was pulled over a few weeks ago by a motor jockey and I was looking at him in my mirror I literally thought he was going to chew his tongue off he was so pissed , he looked like a meth head tweaking out I wasn't about to lip off cause you could tell he was wanting some action.

There is plenty of blame to go around here. I don't anticipate any charges being brought on the officers. I don't think their will be a civil court date either. The City of Moore is probably already negotiating a large settlement with the Rodriquez family and new training and maybe even new leadership at the helm of Moore PD. Going to court will not fare well for them because the average citizen believes police should be respected however, officers should handle their authority responsibly and make every effort to not take a life without cause. They either pay a few million now and re-tool/re-train their officers or pay out several million in court.

Cops will always stick together ,it's a brotherhood. To think that anyone of us could be killed in front of our family just for backing up to a cop in mind blowing. This new breed of cop is hopped up on steroids and suffers from PTSD and you better not make the mistake of saying or doing something they don't like or you will pay for it. I was pulled over a few weeks ago by a motor jockey and I was looking at him in my mirror I literally thought he was going to chew his tongue off he was so pissed , he looked like a meth head tweaking out I wasn't about to lip off cause you could tell he was wanting some action.

[Conspiracy theorists] will always stick together ,it's a brotherhood. To think that anyone of us could be [made as paranoid as they] in front of our family just for backing up to a [conspiracy theorist] in mind blowing. This new breed of [conspiracy theorist] is hopped up on [fear] and suffers from [extreme paranoia] and you better not make the mistake of saying or doing something they don't like or you will pay for it. I was [cornered] a few [posts] ago by a [conspiracy theorist] and I was looking at [his words] [on my monitor] I literally thought he was going to chew his tongue off he was so pissed , he [wrote] like a meth head tweaking out I wasn't about to lip off cause you could tell he was wanting some [trolling] action.

[Conspiracy theorists] will always stick together ,it's a brotherhood. To think that anyone of us could be [made as paranoid as they] in front of our family just for backing up to a [conspiracy theorist] in mind blowing. This new breed of [conspiracy theorist] is hopped up on [fear] and suffers from [extreme paranoia] and you better not make the mistake of saying or doing something they don't like or you will pay for it. I was [cornered] a few [posts] ago by a [conspiracy theorist] and I was looking at [his words] [on my monitor] I literally thought he was going to chew his tongue off he was so pissed , he [wrote] like a meth head tweaking out I wasn't about to lip off cause you could tell he was wanting some [trolling] action.

Nice play on words KP

Serious question I am hoping someone can answer: when private security stops you for some reason on private property while performing for-profit functions of a commercial third party, what does the law say the 'detainee' has to do? What if the private security folks are moonlighting off-duty game wardens? What if they are moonlighting off-duty police officers? I really don't know the answer to this question, and it strikes me that everyone probably should.

Serious question I am hoping someone can answer: when private security stops you for some reason on private property while performing for-profit functions of a commercial third party, what does the law say the 'detainee' has to do? What if the private security folks are moonlighting off-duty game wardens? What if they are moonlighting off-duty police officers? I really don't know the answer to this question, and it strikes me that everyone probably should.

While I am sure it may differ from agency to agency, I know when I am working off duty security, if something criminal takes place and I have to intervene, my status transitions from that of being security for the events, to "on duty" for my primary employer. Anything minor, the consensus is to simply keep things calm then hand it over to shift officers so I can resume my security gig.

Serious question I am hoping someone can answer: when private security stops you for some reason on private property while performing for-profit functions of a commercial third party, what does the law say the 'detainee' has to do? What if the private security folks are moonlighting off-duty game wardens? What if they are moonlighting off-duty police officers? I really don't know the answer to this question, and it strikes me that everyone probably should.

There is Oklahoma case law that states a police officer working as a private security guard has no more power than that of an average citizen. Can still make an arrest but has to follow the law as it relates to a citizen's arrest. I have had cases thrown out due to this very issue.

While I am sure it may differ from agency to agency, I know when I am working off duty security, if something criminal takes place and I have to intervene, my status transitions from that of being security for the events, to "on duty" for my primary employer. Anything minor, the consensus is to simply keep things calm then hand it over to shift officers so I can resume my security gig.


There is Oklahoma case law that states a police officer working as a private security guard has no more power than that of an average citizen. Can still make an arrest but has to follow the law as it relates to a citizen's arrest. I have had cases thrown out due to this very issue.

So which is it mister officer and mister lawyer. Who's right?

So which is it mister officer and mister lawyer. Who's right?

You have to look at it dependent upon the situation. I'll use this as an example, if an officer is working bank security and there's just an upset customer, you stay in security mode, ensure it doesn't escalate and try to calm things if they'll let you. Now, change the incident to a violent crime such as a robbery, you'd respond to the situation as an officer to protect the lives of the tellers and customers.

This is what legal has instructed us. Additionally, we were instructed that if summoned for help and identified by the requesting party as a peace officer, at that moment you're "on duty." Of course, common sense comes into play and I'll let that slide on something small like the upset customer referenced above.

So which is it mister officer and mister lawyer. Who's right?

In the Moore situation you have BOTH hired security on scene (off duty LE) AND on-duty officers who were at the theater because security called regarding intoxicated individuals.

Additionally, I have conducted literally dozens and dozens of citizen arrests and most people would be shocked of the latitude given to the average citizen to perform an arrest.

I think the Moore case is simply going to come down to the victim took an offensive stance and had to be forcibly subdued and continued to struggle until he suffered a medical emergency. Its sad, its unfortunate, but I'd imagine in the end its legal - if not in the eyes of the DA, then certainly in the eyes of a less emotional public who have been sworn to sit on a jury.

So which is it mister officer and mister lawyer. Who's right?

All I will say is that every case we have had like this, the judge has agreed with us and the case has been thrown out if the off duty police officer working as a private security guard has not followed the citizen's arrest procedure. I'm not saying he can't take action...he just has to do it as a citizen.

There is Oklahoma case law that states a police officer working as a private security guard has no more power than that of an average citizen. Can still make an arrest but has to follow the law as it relates to a citizen's arrest. I have had cases thrown out due to this very issue.

I have the same experience. I had an A&B on a police officer case thrown out last year for this exact reason. Cop was even in uniform, but he was working as private security.

If he's just off-duty, he can instantly transition to a police officer. If he's working for someone else, he can't.

This thread is really interesting, thanks guys especially nice to hear the views of a lawyer and an officer. So I have two more probably dumb questions. The first one is, what does our state define as a 'law enforcement officer?' Would the two guys involved in the Moore incident from the other agency, I think they were game wardens or something like that, would they be considered officers under the law?

The second question is something that Brian brought up... "citizens arrests." I could have sworn a lawyer friend once told me that there was no such thing codified in our law and that it was basically a TV drama thing. Is that not the case? Can a non-LEO person "detain" another private citizen? I assume if they can and they are wrong, or don't have iron-clad evidence, they are in a position of extreme liability.

And yep, I understand that in the Moore scenario several on-duty officers arrived and responded at the scene. My question was more hypothetical.

I know quite a few people that work private security that aren't LEOs for their regular job. They are just ordinary citizens. So what do they transition to when a situation arises?

This thread is really interesting, thanks guys especially nice to hear the views of a lawyer and an officer. So I have two more probably dumb questions. The first one is, what does our state define as a 'law enforcement officer?' Would the two guys involved in the Moore incident from the other agency, I think they were game wardens or something like that, would they be considered officers under the law?

The second question is something that Brian brought up... "citizens arrests." I could have sworn a lawyer friend once told me that there was no such thing codified in our law and that it was basically a TV drama thing. Is that not the case? Can a non-LEO person "detain" another private citizen? I assume if they can and they are wrong, or don't have iron-clad evidence, they are in a position of extreme liability.

And yep, I understand that in the Moore scenario several on-duty officers arrived and responded at the scene. My question was more hypothetical.

Citizen's arrest is very real and covered under Oklahoma law. That said, there really is no black and white "citizen's arrest procedure." Its a huge grey area within the law. Want to see citizen's arrest pushed to extremes you had no idea existed ... ride along with bounty hunters (which I've done many times). In all reality, citizens have more (or broader) arrest powers than police in many circumstances. The law says when a citizen can (and in some case is obligated to) arrest someone. The problem is, the guidelines to do so don't really exist and citizens certainly do not have any training or policies to follow like police do.


Can a non-LEO person "detain" another private citizen?

Absolutely. You just open yourself up to civil and possible criminal liability.

Absolutely. You just open yourself up to civil and possible criminal liability.

and the possibility of a punch to the face.

and the possibility of a punch to the face.

No different than what happens to police on occasion (or worse).

Personally, if someone else's actions rise to the point I think I need to perform a citizen's arrest, then I really don't concern myself with the possibility of a punch to the face.

This thread just got really educational.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9efgLHgsBmM

Thanks gjl! LOL!!!

Not a surprise but the DA will not hassle the cops that killed that guy outside Warren Theatre. Folks need to learn you just don't go out in public so messed up that fighting the police seems like a good idea. They can radio for backup, you can't.

Not a surprise but the DA will not hassle the cops that killed that guy outside Warren Theatre. Folks need to learn you just don't go out in public so messed up that fighting the police seems like a good idea. They can radio for backup, you can't.man that's kind of a sh&tty view. So just because they back-up we should act like cowards? I've confronted the police many times simply because I treat people like they treat me.

If it were me, I would've had those police officers involved put to death, but this wonderful society we have won't even fire them. Have to love it.

I am talking about physically confronting them. I am not a wilting flower and I will "discuss" with an officer why he is messing with me and what my rights are. You start scuffling with one and that is just plain foolishness.

I am talking about physically confronting them. I am not a wilting flower and I will "discuss" with an officer why he is messing with me and what my rights are. You start scuffling with one and that is just plain foolishness.

It's like taking a pocket knife to a fight where the other guy has a gun, stun gun, mace and a whole lot of friends.

man that's kind of a sh&tty view. So just because they back-up we should act like cowards? I've confronted the police many times simply because I treat people like they treat me.

If it were me, I would've had those police officers involved put to death, but this wonderful society we have won't even fire them. Have to love it.

Is it really a sh&tty view? Or is is more of the pragmaTic variety?
Seriously: In real life you are dealing with people who chose to get paid to "enforce the law."
Only a fool would DIRECTLY challenge that product of Authority.
Plus they are accountable for the results.
And responsible for the fallout.

Even when I was a young, stupid, loud-mouthed imbicile--relatively speaking--I knew enough not to
"challenge" the "role" of the cop on the street. geez.

If the cop is older than you, say Sir.
If he's a kid say Officer.

Follow that with, "Yes" and/or a straight answer to his or her questions.
Otherwise this sort of nonsense ensues.
Trust me on this.

Unless, of course, you are actually guilty of a crime.
In that case, say: Officer/Sir, I have nothing to say. where's my lawyer?

I am talking about physically confronting them. I am not a wilting flower and I will "discuss" with an officer why he is messing with me and what my rights are. You start scuffling with one and that is just plain foolishness.We'll see where that logic gets us than. I'm getting very a cold heart towards law enforcement so it's probably best to stay out of the threads about them seeing how some posters feel about it.

I will say this, I will not let people shove me around. Period.

To, RM, I used to be respectful and call police officers "sir"- hell will freeze over before that happens again. Let me say, my feelings towards the leo's have nothing to do with this incident nor the speeding tickets I have gotten. I have had and seen others have issues since this year that are nearly impossible to believe.

This will be my last post in this thread, so see ya.

I didn't mean to upset anybody. For me saying "Sir" is cheaper than a ticket. I learned to say it without really meaning it in the Military.

I didn't mean to upset anybody. For me saying "Sir" is cheaper than a ticket. I learned to say it without really meaning it in the Military.You didn't upset me at all. I've just had some very displeasure experiences with the wonderful loes here in Edmond recently. I am not pleased

I honestly thought Mashburn would take action against one or more of the officers involved. So, let's hear from: USDOJ: US Attorney's Office - Western District of Oklahoma (http://www.justice.gov/usao/okw/meetattorney.html)

This was the right decision and really the only one the DA could make in light of the actual evidence (not emotions).

FYI Plutonic Panda - showing cops respect for their authority and obeying their commands is a far cry from 'acting like cowards.'

That doesn't mean you have to respect them as individuals or an organization. I've met very few cops I respect (or even think are decent human beings), but I only resist their commands to a point and only when I have a camera rolling as proof of my actions.

The only way you win against a cop is to covertly record their actions, obey ALL laws yourself and then take it up with police administration later with your evidence. Otherwise, you're screwed!

This was the right decision and really the only one the DA could make in light of the actual evidence (not emotions).

FYI Plutonic Panda - showing cops respect for their authority and obeying their commands is a far cry from 'acting like cowards.'

That doesn't mean you have to respect them as individuals or an organization. I've met very few cops I respect (or even think are decent human beings), but I only resist their commands to a point and only when I have a camera rolling as proof of my actions.

The only way you win against a cop is to covertly record their actions, obey ALL laws yourself and then take it up with police administration later with your evidence. Otherwise, you're screwed!

Comply at the interaction and sue later. When departments go broke defending themselves in court, they might retrain their staff. It's always better to be alive.

You didn't upset me at all. I've just had some very displeasure experiences with the wonderful loes here in Edmond recently. I am not pleased

I understand where you're coming from.

I guess I don't know all of the facts here, and I suspect BBates knows what he is talking about, but the cops at the very least overreacted in this situation. One wonders if there was a language barrier. Either way, the message is sent: cops can pretty much get away with anything when it comes to the use of force.

I guess I don't know all of the facts here, and I suspect BBates knows what he is talking about, but the cops at the very least overreacted in this situation. One wonders if there was a language barrier. Either way, the message is sent: cops can pretty much get away with anything when it comes to the use of force.

It simply came down to the suspect was legally placed into investigative detention, he squared off with the officers and refused to comply with their legal commands. The officers then tried to restrain the suspect and used perfectly legal techniques to do so. Just so happened the suspect was not in good health.

Had he simply contained his emotions and his anger and complied with their justifiable requests, he would still be alive.

I can only imagine the grief the daughter must be feeling (the spark that ignited the event).

I won't deny this matter might have been handled differently.
Tthat is a far cry however from determining the way it was handled would warrant charges.

And PluPan, whatever your issues with leos in general, wishing these officers dead, when those who have looked more closely than you don't even see a basis to bring a charge against any one of them, well, that's just special, though not in a happy party day kind of way.

Whatever some folks have convinced themselves happened, it would appear that this, wasn't that, and apparently wasn't even close to being that.

It simply came down to the suspect was legally placed into investigative detention, he squared off with the officers and refused to comply with their legal commands. The officers then tried to restrain the suspect and used perfectly legal techniques to do so. Just so happened the suspect was not in good health.

Had he simply contained his emotions and his anger and complied with their justifiable requests, he would still be alive.

I can only imagine the grief the daughter must be feeling (the spark that ignited the event).

Cops can get away with force in just about any circumstance. What about them confiscating the phone and deleting the video; is my memory failing me or did that happen? If that were you or me wouldn't we be charged for obstruction of justice / destroying evidence?

I don't think they deleted the video but I'm not sure. So what was he being detained for again? Was he under arrest when wrestled him to the ground?

Police were summoned because of a domestic battery report. The deceased's wife reportedly struck their daughter in the face. When off-duty officers working security responded to investigate (they reportedly did not know at the time who struck who; only that there was an alleged domestic battery), the deceased individual reportedly became combative and belligerent. When they attempted to subdue him he became physically distressed and eventually succumbed to his physical ailments. At least, this is how things were reported in the more detailed and less sensational media accounts.

Urbanized, the "combative" nature of the deceased was related to his refusal to provide ID, no?

And PluPan, whatever your issues with leos in general, wishing these officers dead,Now Kevin, don't put words in my mouth. I said the police who were responsible for the murder of the guy in front of the Warren theatre should be charged with 1 st degree murder and charged as such. If it were and I found them guilty, they would be put to death like any other person. I am wishing death on anyone, I am simply removing people from society that are a threat.

Plupan, last sentence in post number 162? :wink:

Cops can get away with force in just about any circumstance. What about them confiscating the phone and deleting the video; is my memory failing me or did that happen? If that were you or me wouldn't we be charged for obstruction of justice / destroying evidence?

The video was never deleted. The phone was taken as material evidence and held in police custody until they could secure a warrant.

The only thing I don't like about that policy is that - for me personally - Is that they say they are doing it to secure the evidence and make sure it is not lost, stolen or tampered with. The problem is, I've never seen it exercised unless or until its involves allegations against a police officer. I've literally taped hundreds and hundreds of crimes; prostitution, drug dealing, pimping, assault and battery, armed robbery, burglary, and even two forcible kidnappings, etc. NEVER is my video taken from me at the scene unless it involves possible wrongdoing by the police. This has happened four times in 17 years.... Once was the Donald Pete arrest, another time was when a cop was accused of sexually assaulting a woman while placing her under arrest. The third was when I taped officers forcefully removing three Hispanics from a vehicle involved in a hit and run. The fourth time was when I caught a very popular recently retired police officer (don't recall his rank) with a prostitute. The first time was the Donald Pete case and my refusal got me arrested at the scene. I learned from that and now I simply act compliant and then quickly leave during the commotion and make a copy of the video and turn a copy over to police the same or next day.


Urbanized, the "combative" nature of the deceased was related to his refusal to provide ID, no?

Actually, it was related to the domestic disturbance that was going on. Nothing in the man's history shows he would have refused to show ID had police asked for it under any other circumstance.

As for refusing to show ID - that's a poor choice the now deceased made. Like it or not, police have every right to ask to see your ID when they show up to a likely crime scene. If you're going to fight (literally or figuratively) the law, you'd best actually know the law first.

Some people try to turn this into some situation where gov't officers were marching around demanding to 'see people's papers' and doing so without cause. That is simply ignorance and blind bias as there is absolutely not a sure of evidence that occurred. I personally met one of the main officers involved and he struck me as the complete opposite of the stereotypical bully cop.

So does failing to show ID now rise to the level of "an aggressive stance"? If so, wow. I find it interesting that they don't release video of the interaction that led to the take down - I am sure at this point the general public would not define it as "aggressive" in nature.

So someone who was not a participant in a crime is now required to show ID or else?

For the record - I don't think these cops are evil, just incompetent.

After viewing the newly released video a couple of times last night, I have just one question:

If the situation were reversed and five civilians were pummelling one officer who was already down, using knee blows, would the civilians also be found innocent of all wrongdoing?

Even 50 years ago when I covered the cop shop for the Oklahoman, some folk were more equal than others, and it was common for people to fall upstairs in the back of a black-and-white...