follow-on to socal cop shooting

[pilot_man]

What we say on here is an opinion and just that. The cop isn't going to die because we say we think he is guilty. That is just our opinion and we are entitled to it. Whether we have all of the facts or not. We are not on the jury so we are allowed to form those preconceived ideas and it doesn't matter. You say he’s innocent; I say he’s guilty. It doesn’t matter.

 

[wink]

What we say on here is an opinion and just that. The cop isn't going to die because we say we think he is guilty. That is just our opinion and we are entitled to it. Whether we have all of the facts or not. We are not on the jury so we are allowed to form those preconceived ideas and it doesn't matter. You say he’s innocent; I say he’s guilty. It doesn’t matter.

Sure enough. Some opinions are informed, however, and some are not. I'm just doing my part to inform those that are interested in forming their opinions from an educated vantage. If after that there is still diagreement, so be it.

If you have read my posts, to include the most recent, you would know that I don't think he is innocent. My very position is to wait for more information. I don't know anything more about the facts then I did the day after the shooting.

On this forum and as a general practice in aviation, especially professional aviation, we do not speculate on the causes of aviation mishaps or place blame before professionals complete a thorough investigation. Why doesn't this cop warrent the same from those who would wish not to be judged after a mishap. You are free to have an opinion. But opinions that would do damage to a guys reputation are to be dispensed much more carefully then any others.

 

[rare21]

The article says nothing about an internal investigation. It only says the DA has determined charges are warranted. That was based on a seperate criminal investigation. An internal investigation takes place parallel but seperate from the criminal investigation. The facts found and interviews taken by the internal affairs or profession standards officers can not be shared with the DA. This is to protect the officers constitutional rights. The IA investigation simply determines whether the cop was out of department policy. It is not uncommon for a cop to be disciplined for being out of policy and not be charged with any criminal offense or even sued. In fact, it is just as common that a cop not be disciplined for being out of policy and still get sued and the department/officer lose in a civil court. Do not infer anything from the internal investigation vv the criminal charges. The DA has not and can not.

never heard of this, this makes it seem like an internal police investigation is a waste of time AND taxpayer money. After the video played all over the news it was ended with "officer so and so is suspended pending an internal investigation." So whats the point of having one if the DA can just go up and do whatever he wants? Is the internal investigation not public record? If not, at least the results should be...I believe it is in Texas (i dont know about California). Would this be the same that happened to the cops in New Orleans that beat on that school teacher on Bourbon street? They were found not guilty of any wrongdoing but fired from their job anyways. If the internal investigation and criminal trial were two different things then this kind of makes sense.

as far as this cop goes, i havent changed my mind, i believe he's guilty. Give me sh!t about it all you want but as said before its my opinion. It might have been changed if the deputy hadnt of cursed every word in the book at the airman AFTER pumping him full of lead. Seemed almost inhuman. At times its those small things that influence public opinion.

 

[rare21]

This is from the Sheriff of San Bernadino:
"In any type of investigation it is the responsibility of the Sheriff's Department to put together all the facts," Penrod said Tuesday. "The district attorney's role is to take those facts and determine whether there is sufficient evidence to issue a criminal complaint. Obviously that was their choice in this investigation."

so wouldnt this be the sheriff's internal investigation giving their finding to the DA???????


From a cop with some info that i hadnt heard:

"Some interesting info for everyone...I work for an agency near Chino. Here is what I know of the situation from people I know who work for SBSD in Chino Hills. The deputy was assigned to patrol at the Chino Hills Police Department, one of 14 contract cities SBSD has. Obviously, there was a pursuit that went into the City of Chino, where the Corvette crashed. What has not been reported in the media is that the driver and passenger of the Corvette began fighting with the deputy, for upwards of 5 minutes. The dep is 45, the occupants of the car are early 20's. The fight was bad enough that a resident in the community, at about 11pm, called Chino PD advising them that one of their officers was being beat down pretty bad and to send help fast, thinking the deputy was a Chino PD officer. At some point, the dep was able to back off and draw his weapon. THAT is about when the tape starts. The driver can be heard on the tape being belligerent, and the airman, while everyone says he was trying to cooperate, can even be heard a little belligerent. When the airman gets up, he gets up pretty fast. The deputy's father was quoted as saying the dep was in fear for his life. I think the airman got up fast and the deputy, who was out of gas because of the fight, was afraid the airman was going to rush him, overpower him, and take his firearm. Also, the dep backs in sort of a tactical L like we are trained with the 21 foot rule, not just standing there like some sort of assassination. Another thing, the airman, as an MP, should know to make slow, deliberate movements when a cop is pointing a gun at you. He got up WAY to fast if he was cooperating. We'll see what the FBI and SBAD investigation uncovers..."


May skew the public opinion if this actually becomes public knowledge and is true of course

Other info: Cop involved is a 10 year veteran (i did not know this).

 

[wink]

never heard of this, this makes it seem like an internal police investigation is a waste of time AND taxpayer money. After the video played all over the news it was ended with "officer so and so is suspended pending an internal investigation." So whats the point of having one if the DA can just go up and do whatever he wants? Is the internal investigation not public record? If not, at least the results should be...I believe it is in Texas (i dont know about California). Would this be the same that happened to the cops in New Orleans that beat on that school teacher on Bourbon street? They were found not guilty of any wrongdoing but fired from their job anyways. If the internal investigation and criminal trial were two different things then this kind of makes sense.

as far as this cop goes, i havent changed my mind, i believe he's guilty. Give me sh!t about it all you want but as said before its my opinion. It might have been changed if the deputy hadnt of cursed every word in the book at the airman AFTER pumping him full of lead. Seemed almost inhuman. At times its those small things that influence public opinion.

Most people don't know this either. That is why I bring it up. Law enforcement and the law in general is just as complex and specialized as military aviation. Most fof the public doesn't really know the reality of your job either.

The reason for the IA investigation and criminal investigation being seperate is to protect the officers civil rights. You all know that you don't have to talk to the police when suspected of a crime, right? Just dumby up and call in your mouth piece (lawyer). Well, what if the police are you employers and talking to them about your actions on the job is a condition of employment? That means you MUST tell your boss, the cops, what happened, or be disciplined. That is why what you tell IA people can not be used against you in a criminal investigation. Anything you tell IA was basicly coersed by a threat of discipline or termination and may incriminate yourself.. It is true that the SBSD did both investigations. That is normal. The IA guys are seperate and apart from the normal chain of command, not unlike Safety is in Naval Avaition. Regular detectives that would respond to a crime committed on your person would have investigated this and sent their report to the DA. The IA guys can use the stuff from the criminal investigation, but anything they dig up them selves, particularly the statements of employees can not go to the DA, so they are different investagators. The IA report goes to the sheriff or any disciplinary board arrangement SB Co. has.

The Internal investigations are not a waste of money because they are required to enforce policy and ensure good order and professionalism in the force. Some times the IA results differ from the criminal or civil suit results, like in N.O. That is not only because of the info the IA investigator may have the DA or jury doesn't, but the standard of proof is so different. We all know the criminal standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt". Some don't know that in civil court the standard is "more likely then not", sometimes called the 51% rule. Since the IA results will only determine ones employment status and not his liberty, the standard is much less then "reasonable doubt". So it is, again, unconstitutional to infer anything from an IA determination in a criminal court. In most cases, the disciplinary actions of an IA board are not admitted in court, althought the results are public. The actual investigation very rarely is made public.

Although we can not know if the additional info you provided about the incident is true, it does illustrate how reality can differ from perception. I have to say that a similar scenario was put to me when I first started to volunteer for my sheriff's office. If you are being beat to He!! and have reason to believe that if the lights go out your gun will be taken and used on you, you don't have to wait until you start to grey out or the blood is bluring your vision to take action to prevent your weapon from being taken. It is a tough call (reasonabe fear anyone). Has the suspect made a move for your weapon during the fight? Is the suspect known to have used deadly force in the past. Is the suspect wanted for a crime that will put him away for a long time, or a fugitive that has made staements about not going back to jail? Is the suspect known to have suicidal tendancies? Did he verbally threaten to kill the officer? Try making that analysis as you are fighting with a couple suspects on a dark and lonely road not even knowing if help is on the way. Hey, it is a tough job. I chose not to do it as a career and so rely on cops that have to deal with crap like that to protect my family. And they have families too. For that reason alone, I will give them the benefit of doubt. But if they do screw the pooch, I want their ass!:icon_rage