Next week, Monday-Thursday—February 25-28—California Pizza Kitchen has kindly offered to give 20 percent of your dinner check, drinks included, to the families of Riverside Police officer Michael Crain, and San Bernardino Sheriff’s Detective Jeremiah MacCay, both of whom were allegedly killed by Christopher Dorner.
Detective MacKay was killed in a shootout with Dorner in Big Bear. Michael Crain and his partner were ambushed by a man assumed to be Dorner. As Dorner had no particular beef with Riverside PD, there seemed to be no reason behind the shooting, other than the fact the men were police officers.
Detective MacCay and Officer Crain each leave behind a wife and two kids.
The fundraising offer will be honored at any California Pizza Kitchen anywhere in the state, from February 25-28—all day.
The deal is you have to print out the flyer I’ve linked to here and present it to your server.
Pizza and generosity. A good combo.
NOTE: The money raised is being overseen by the Riverside Police Officers’ Association and the Sheriff’s Employee Assistance Team.
Celeste, forgive me if I seem to be nitpicking your reporting. That is not my intent. I’m bringing this up again because I ‘m truly perplexed about how, at certain times, you feel the necessity to use the term “alleged” or “allegedly”. I know you previously explained it as just being an ethical and responsible part of being a journalist. Here’s why I’m perplexed, even with your explanation of it.
From your above thread, paragrap one
“To the families of Riverside Police officer Michael Crain, and San Bernardino Sheriff’s Detective Jeremiah MacCay, both of whom were allegedly killed by Dorner”.
Then in the opening sentence of the next paragraph:
“Detective MacCay was killed in a shoot out with Dorner in Big Bear”.
Here’s why I’m perplexed by your use of the word alleged. There has been no reports, by anyone present at the scene, that there was more than one gunman in Big Bear. The body recovered has been positively identified as Dorner.
So why the “allegedly” disclaimer previously? Because Dorner hasn’t been convicted in a court of law? He never will be. Should the survivors of Mr. MacCay, and all the other victims have to endure members of the media referring to the “alleged” murderer of their beloved victims?
Just a thought.
ATQ,
Great question, really.
It drives me nuts too. It’s clumsy from a word-smithing perspective, and feels idiotic, from a human POV . But it’s legally correct. I can kinda skate the edge with Deputy MacCay’s murder, because as you say, it was conclusively proven that Dorner was in that house so who else could have killed MacCay in the firefight that occurred a couple of hours before MacCay was shot? So I gave him one clean sentence, after the first collective “allegedly.”
But, although no rational person thinks that anyone other than Dorner killed Michael Crain and wounded his partner, it’s not been proven in a court of law.
Thus I’m writing it in a way that’s legally and professionally correct—much as it bugs me in cases like these.
Moreover, it doesn’t come naturally to me. I think you’ve likely gathered from reading WLA for a while, I’m anything but a by-the-book, J-School type writer/journalist. But there are certain things I’m rigorous about. (At least I attempt to be.)
When I teach, I drop students’ work a full grade for an error in fact OR omitting the word “alleged (or an equivalent), when its legally required. Some of my colleagues are more hard core. They give an F on the paper.
Admittedly, with situations like Dormer, “allegedly” feels dissonent.
I kinda look at it like this. If there isn’t any doubt in any reasonable person’s mind ( the key being “reasonable”) then I shouldn’t feel the need to be legally correct, or worried about it being an error in fact.
Murder-suicides happen all the time. Nobody feels the need to use the term allegedly in these cases.
Where Detective MacCay is concerned, that’s exactly what it was, a murder suicide.
Just because someone isn’t convicted in a court of law, it’s not.ethically or legally necessary to use the term “allegedly”
Just my opinion.
I agree with both of you. It’s highly obnoxious and kind of insulting, even if it is a journalistic standard, that Dorner will forever be alleged to be a psychopathic murderer of innocent people simply because he tried to kill everyone who might, through his arrest, allow the journalists to dispense with the word. It feels like a reasonableness standard should exist/prevail. After all, and not to bring hyperbole or get sidetracked into a historical debate, but nobody “alleges” that Hitler is responsible for the Holocaust, despite a lack of documentary or legal proof, that John Wilkes Booth shot President Lincoln, or so on. It seems like if you’re killed in a shootout with police and there’s no evidence to the contrary, reasonable people should be able to agree.
Gentlemen/Ladies, we both know what happened and who killed those 4 innocent victims.
I just want to thank Celeste though for posting the fund raising information at CPK next week.
Celeste, keep Hammering LASD too! I would love to reveal some Skeletons!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU9P0Grg46M&feature=youtube_gdata_player
10-33 that is an excellent point. If you ask any scholar, lawyer or journaist who assasinated Abraham Lincoln they will not reply with:
“Allegedly it was John Wilkes Booth”.
My point exactly, and thank you for using a real life example.
We do not know how Detective MacCay was killed and we cannot expect objectivity from the Sheriff of San Bernardino County in making the official determination.
This is not a knock on the SB County Sheriff. The dynamic between his position, the operation and the deceased creates a powerful counter to any determination other than assigning Dormer 100% responsibility for the death of Detective MacCay.
The San Bernardino Sheriff, or any sheriff under the same circumstances, would be subject to some of the same forces which drove the U.S. Army to an original determination that Pat Tilman was killed by enemy fire in Afghanistan.
The Army’s original determination on Pat Tilman was only reassessed and revised following a period of prolonged and determined pressure by Tilman’s family and supporters who were unsatisfied with the details provided in support of the determination.
Let’s consider, for example, the case if Detective MacCay’s death resulted from “friendly fire” or some cause other than 100% directly attributable to Dorner:
1. it can be reasonably assumed that Detective MacCay’s family would suffer even greater anguish under the suggestion his death may have been avoidable. The natural desire to minimize their emotional suffering creates pressure towards a determination of 100% Dormer responsible
2. a “friendly fire” scenario would likely result in criticism and negative public sentiment about the SB County Sheriff’s management of the Dorner operation in Big Bear. The Sheriff and his organization are subject to internal pressure that counters making a determination which invites criticism.
The search for Dorner can be likened to a hunt for a single insurgent within a civilian area. The best approach is to come with a cohesive unit which has trained together in the tactics of this type of operation. A S.W.A.T. unit is likely the best fit in the domestic civilian setting. If San Bernardino doesn’t have an appropriate unit of their own available then they request to borrow a S.W.A.T. from another agency. The S.W.A.T. leader is given command of the immedeate operation and everybody else is ordered to stand back and away, prepared to lend assistance if requested.
The S.W.A.T. commander will match the positioning and tasks of his team members to best fit the scenario. More than that creates a counterproductive and unnecessarily dangerous situation.
3. A determination of “friendly fire” eventually leads down the road of civil litigation against SB County Sheriff. That opens the door to a potential high dollar damage payout for negligence in the sheriff’s management of the operation as a contributing factor in the death of Detective MacCay.
In fact, regardless of whether Detective MacCay was killed by Dormer or by “friendly fire”, San Bernardino County is likely to face a civil claim from the survivors of Detective MacCay. The survivors will question whether Detective MacCay should have been assigned to the front lines in Big Bear in the first place. Was MacCay’s current state of training and proficiency properly matched to his assignment in the Dormer operation? Were the other deputies in Big Bear the best match available for the task and was there a clear line of command and communication in place given the circumstances??
If Detective MacCay and others had volunteered for this dangerous assignment does not qualify as an acceptable method of staffing the Dormer operation. In fact, using a volunteer list to staff the operation would constitute initial evidence of negligence by the management.
There is no reason for the public to have complete confidence in SB County Sheriff’s conclusion on the death of Detective MacCay, nor does the public expect him alone to overcome the forces which prevent an objective investigation and determination.
There is no reason for the family of Detective MacCay to blindly accept the SB County Sheriff’s determination either.
Once the initial emotional trauma of his death has begun to settle, MacCay’s family will expect the SB County Sheriff to fill in the details supporting his conclusion.
They will want sufficient proof that MacCay’s death was reasonably unforeseeable and unavoidable given the circumstances. The SB Sheriff should expect they will be no less tenacious than Pat Tilman’s family in pursuit of transparency and truth.
The shortest path to the Sheriff of SB County demonstrating transparency and confidence in his determination is to invite an independent inquiry.
He could solicit assistance from the military or another source of investigators experienced in making this type of inquiry and allow them full and unfettered access to evidence and to personnel for interview.
The comments on this entry have sought to quell discussion and subvert inquiry into the deaths of these two law enforcement officers by employing shamefully despicable semantic tactics.
There is the suggestion that anyone who does not swear allegiance to Dorner as the killer is then himself guilty of insult to the deceased officers.
I contend that the comments #1, #3-#7 are insulting and degrading to the lives and memory of the 2 officers.
These men distinguished themselves through their words and deeds and relationships. Their true quality of character is known to and irrefutable to those who knew and interacted with them. This knowledge and the depth of loss is not altered by the circumstances of their deaths.
However, individuals with their own hidden agendas may do insult to the value of their lives in attempting to deny them and their surviving family their equal due of a comprehensive, complete, professional, exhaustive and objective investigation into the causes and circumstances of their deaths.
Answering The Question, 10-33_Go and Night Train each are reminiscent of the dialogue from films like To Kill A Mockingbird where a conclusion of guilt is foregone and requests to provide any real evidence are dismissed as laughable foolishness because, as everyone should already know, the black guy did it and that is sufficient for the respected elders of the community, case closed.
The false logic and propaganda tactics practiced by each of these commenters parallels those used by Hitler during his rise to power. They seek to isolate, smear and bully anyone who seeks to question the claims of the dictator.
Every citizen who supports democracy and every professional practicioner of journalism should reject these attempts to silence debate and inquiry into the death of these two officers or any other aspect of the official conclusions surrounding Dorner.
Before the commenters attempt to reenter the dialogue surrounding Dormer and who did what to whom, I suggest they familiarize themselves with the history of The Dreyfus Affair.
Prophet Mo Teff says:
I believe the Chief Coroner for San Bernardino County will be tasked with
determing the cause of death of Deputy MacCay. Is it your belief the
Coroner’s Office will also be unduly influenced by these unseen negative
forces? Also, in this case, the “black guy” did do it. Either by his own
hands or his actions which contrjbuted to the deady encounter. Get over
your conspiracy theories and the chip on your shoulder. (Respectfully)
^^^^^^^As stated previously, the key is any reasonable person. That leaves those who see a conspiracy to “hide the truth” about every incident discussed out.
No worries Mo. Everybody else is on the wrong track. You’ve got it all figured out.
Bandwagon, you are spot on. Between searching for conspiracy theories and attempting to educate the rest of us minions, Prophet Mo overlooked the obvious. That Dorner, should he be alive, would be charged with Det. MacCay’s murder even if he didn’t fire the fatal round(s) that killed him.
I guess in his efforts to prove how prophetic he can be, he overlooked the obvious. That Dorner, if engaged in a shoot out with the cops and it results in the death of anyone as the result of his felonious actions, is guilty of murder per the law.
So much for his Tillman analogy.
Isn’t close to being the same thing.
Some guys are so far behind in the race they think they’re ahead.
It usually doesn’t do any good to point it out to them. They refuse to see what IS there and keep searching for what iISN’t there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGb0AOwf6b4&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Answering the Question and Bandwagon are pulling the pins and lobbing ad hominem grenades over the fence towards me.
They accuse me of seeing a “conspiracy theory” behind every incident – and I haven’t posted a single word involving any conspiracy theories related to Dormer, — yet.
San Bernardino County Sheriff-Coroner John McMahon sees evidence of a conspiracy involving Dormer in Big Bear. According to his public statements, The Sheriff is still waiting to hear a plausible explanation for the number of weapons and amount of ammunition and belongings found in the burned-out cabin.
The official scenario has Dorner crashing one vehicle, then carjacking another vehicle, then stopping and running away from that vehicle, then breaking into the cabin where he remained until his death. The officers he ran from saw Dorner carrying only one rifle, and no other weapons or bags .
Dorner has generated a tremendous amount of media coverage, involved enormous law enforcement resources and sustained a level of sensation equivalent to “mania”.
On the other hand, there has been scarce reference to any evidence usually associated with crimes of this nature. Not even any mention of evidence it is assumed they should already have booked and filed, for example:
fingerprints from the last two vehicles Dorner used,
fingerprints from cabin where Dorner hid-out in sight of the command center,
handwriting analysis of the hand addressed letter to Anderson Cooper,
verification of the registration and source of each individual firearm attributed to Dorner over the course of the ordeal.
The public has been told that an LAPD unit with 2 officers from Newton Division was sent to Corona, Riverside County in the early AM of Feb.7.
The LAPD unit approached and took fire from a Dorner suspect vehicle at 1:10am. The LAPD unit became disabled and could not pursue the suspect. One officer received a grazing on his forehead.
The public has been provided no claim that this incident was immedeately reported to local law enforcement and no urgent bulletin was sent to patrol units in the field.
Sometime between 1:25 – 1:45am RPD Officer Michael Craine was shot and killed and RPD officer Andrew Tachias severely wounded because they had been left unnotified and had been left unprepared and left with no excuse or explanation 100% vulnerable to ambush while in their patrol vehicle at an intersection.
how long before we get some answers about what really happened in Corona, Riverside February 7?
When does Officer Michael Crain’s family and kids get some real answers? Must they suspend all of the normal requirements for sufficient evidence accorded every other rational person before we ask them to accept a conclusion about who is to blame for the death of their loved one?
Must they spend the rest of their lives in a self-imposed stupor while smiling and saluting the individuals who murdered Officer Michael Craine??
How could Officer’s Craine and Tachias be left on patrol without receiving an urgent bulletin about Dorner shots fired at LAPD in Corona?
That would not only be reckless. That would be malicious and criminal.
And then there is this:
Christopher Dorner manhunt: Why did Riverside police delete an ‘officer murdered’ tweet?
Ed Joyce | February 14th, 2013, 11:38am
0 Comments
Add your comments
A second social media snarl has come to light in the Christopher Dorner case.
Following the Thursday, Feb. 7 shooting of two Riverside Police Department officers in Riverside, allegedly by murder suspect Christopher Dorner, the Riverside Police Department tweeted the following from their @RiversidePolice Twitter account:
Sometime later that same morning, the tweet was removed. The next tweet from the RPD account, which remains on the department’s timeline:
The last tweet reflects the opening of the Riverside intersection where the shooting happened in the early morning hours on that Thursday.
“The first tweet [‘RPD officer murdered’] was put out prematurely,” Karen Haverkamp, a supervisor with the Riverside Police Department, told KPCC. “It wasn’t wrong, just put up a little bit early.”
The authorities need to start talking about real evidence and real verifiable investigation into the shooting of Officer Crain and Officer Tachias.
If they continue to rely on conclusions unsupported by any evidence, they will by default encourage alternative explanations from outside of their rigid top-down bureaucratic stronghold.
Someone will assert that Officer Crain’s life was sacrificed by unnamed conspirators seeking to influence the California Supreme Court in their upcoming decision on:
LONG BEACH POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION v. CITY OF LONG BEACH (LOS ANGELES TIMES COMMUNICATIONS)
Case Number S200872
10-33_GO in comment #5 on the WitnessLA Feb.6, 2013 page asserted that Mo’ Teff “was crazy” for my comment #4 on Feb.6, 2013 about the announcement by Long Beach Police Chief Jim McDonnel he was interested in succeeding Sheriff Lee Baca at LASD.
I painted McDonnell as the favorite candidate of those whose top priority is for LASD deputy files to remain completely closed and off limits.
My comment also refered to the slow speed chase on the afternoon of February 7, 2012.
February 7, 2012 A.M. California 2nd Appelate District Division 2 issues ruling and unanimous decision denying injunction in:
Trial Court Case: NC055491
Court of Appeal Case: B231245
Supreme Court Case: S200872
Court of Appeal Opinion: [PDF] [DOC]
Caution: For information on when opinions may be cited or relied upon, click here.
Division: 2
Case Caption: Long Beach Police Officers Association et al. v. City of Long Beach
Case Type: CV
Filing Date: 02/22/2011
Oral Argument Date/Time: 12/16/2011 09:00 AM
Cross Referenced Cases:
B231091 City of Long Beach et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County et al.
February 7, 2012 late afternoon – CHP initiates pursuit on I-5 South which exits freeway into residential area of L.A. City. Slow speed pursuit involving LAPD patrol cars and media helicopters zig-zags through residential neighborhood proceeding back and forth on the same streets including past the residence of California Appeals Court Judge who authored the opinion released that morning denying LBPD Chief Jim McDonnel the right to continue defying the California Public Records Act.
February 7, 2013 = RPD Officer Michael Craine ambushed shot and killed in his patrol car.
Prophet Mo, you’ve given us sooooo much info. that it’s hard for a simple minded man like me to digest it. So, in the spirit of making things simple, so a simple minded man like me can understand it, let me ask you a few simple questions.
1. Are you speculating that Det. MacCay was killed in some way other than in a shoot out with Chris Dorner?
2. If you aren’t speculating such, how is it that a brilliant man such as yourself, with such a high powered intellect and your obvious superior ability to reason and your stellar critical thinking skills, failed to recognize the elements of the crime of murder per the CA Penal Code?
3. Because I know you know the law, was it simply that you wanted to be a contrarian when you took issue with me stating Chris Dorner was a murderer, and should be identified as such, without Celeste or anyone else feeling the need to use the term “allegedly”?
4. If you are speculating that Det. MacCay was not killed in a shoot out with Dorner, could you PLEASE tell us your theory on how he died in a clear, concise fashion so myself and all the other simpletons can understand it.
No need to write a 1000 word response. You lose idiots like me when you do so. We’re no where as intelligent as you are.
Yes or no will do for the first two questions. Please keep your answer under 100 words for the third question.
Please be patient with me. I apologize for the inconvenience of you having to dumb down your discussion with me.
1.Yes, MacCay was killed by gunfire. No report made public on what gun fired by whom.
2. You requested a yes or no answer, but you asked a “how” question.
3. If you were the older brother of Michael Crain or Jeremiah MacCay then by about right now – no clarification of events surrounding their deaths – you would start to simmer. By the end of next week, you would start raising hell with Serge Diaz and Jim McConnell. No ballistic reports, no eyewitness affidavits. no certified timestamped audio files of radio transmissions. Yes, there will be a lawsuit. You want the families to just fade away into ambiguity like the details of these men’s deaths?
4. there are so many critical details which remain to get straightened out with the Dorner week, where does one even begin?
We have at least 2 or 3 official versions of every material event. That remains in a holding pattern. Which means the truth is either version #1, or #2, or #3 or none of the above. The current state of dislocution cannot be sustained long term.
We burned up a week in the national media spotlight, spewed thousands of on scene reports, billed millions in salaries, killed 4 and wounded more. The details provided either so sparse they are useless or so incongruous they are simply not believable.
And you want the analysis limited to 100 words.
The only possible way to get the truth at this point is a completely independent inquiry with total access to examine all evidence, all transmissions and communications. and freely interview all participants.
But you want short and succinct. OK.
Did you see the photograph of the white truck that Chris Dorner stole and crashed off the road into a snowbank before fleeing to the cabin which was turned to ashes?
Please take a look at that photo.
What happens when a 270 lb man steps out of the truck onto that snowbank, how far does he get to run?
Questions 1 is a yes or no question. You are correct about the rest of the questions being how’s.
However, if you fail to answer the first question with a “yes” it renders the whole rest of your previous speculations moot.
The U.S. Army lied to the Tilman Family and lied to the American public about how Pat Tilman was killed in Afghanistan.
The U.S Army stuck to their lies until a prolonged and relentless effort by Tilman’s family forced an admission of the truth – the bullet which killed Pat Tilman came from the rifle of a soldier in his own unit. Even now, the Tilman family has received only an ambiguous truth. They have little hope the Army will ever reveal crucial details.
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon is still unclear on how Dorner could flee on foot in the snow carrying only one weapon and yet be found dead in a burned out cabin with several weapons, munitions and materials.
Sheriff McMahon has said that the gun battle was so fierce and involved so many shots fired that we can’t determine exactly which weapons were fired by Dorner.
Deputy MacKay’s honor and virtue are above reproach. His life and legacy are not diminished by the circumstances of his death.
Deputy MacKay was not corrupt.
But the Dorner dog and pony show has no court legs to stand on.
Deputy MacKay’s family deserves real answers supported by real evidence.
Without that, the survivors of Deputy Jeremiah MacKay are looking at another Pat Tilman story.
San Bernardino County is forcing them into a Pat Tilman fight to get the truth.