The story of the fatal shooting of Noel Aguilar by two Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Deputies still has no clear conclusion—especially after the release in mid-December of a new cell phone video (see above), which is disturbing to watch and which suggests that the details of the shooting are different than those previously described by the two sheriff’s deputies involved.
Aguilar was killed by two Los Angeles Sheriff’s deputies in a shooting in Long Beach that occurred on May 26, 2014. The shooting was investigated by the LASD homicide decision and then passed along to the LA County District Attorney’s office, which—in a report issued February 15, 2015 —concluded that the two deputies involved “acted in lawful self defense and defense of others” when they used deadly force against Aguilar.
(You can find the District Attorney’s report here)
When it was clear that the DA’s office wasn’t going to pursue the matter, Aguilar’s family filed a federal civil lawsuit in April 2015.
Then, in mid December, Humberto Guizar and other attorneys for Aguilar’s family, held a press conference and released the new video. And suddenly people began to pay attention.
There was press coverage, although less in Los Angeles itself then the coverage that popped up in various outlets nationally.
After reviewing the video, the Southern California ACLU also weighed in and called for the DA to take another look.
“This new video casts some grave doubts on what occurred during the shooting, So Cal ACLU staff attorney, Catherine Wagner told us. “There are serious difference between what we see in the video and what is in the DA’s report,” she said. “It does cast some serious doubt on the officers’ account.”
HOMICIDE EXAMINES THE VIDEO
The department’s homicide division also saw the video when everyone else did, after the plaintiff’s counsel released it, and realized they definitely needed to take a look.
However, when investigators initially received the new video, they got an edited version, explained Captain Stephen Katz of homicide. So, they weren’t 100 percent sure what they were looking at. Was the supposedly new material, simply a piece of another video they’d already seen, or a completely new item? When the homicide investigators finally got the complete, unedited cell-phone video and analyzed it, they realized that, it was indeed a video they’d not seen before, that provided a different view of the incident. Thus a thorough analysis was launched, said Katz, to find out what the video meant to the investigation.
The new analysis is still in progress, Katz told us.
“Our purpose here is to be fact finders and to find the truth in any situation,” said Katz. “We wouldn’t turn away from new evidence any more than we would if new evidence surfaced in a cold case.”
And the video was new evidence.
Eventually, said Katz, homicide will turn over their revised set of findings—-whatever they might be—to the Justice System Integrity Division of the DA’s office, who will then do their own evaluation.
SO HOW MUCH DIFFERENCE IS THERE?
The story told by the two deputies as it appears in the February district attorney’s report does appear to differ significantly from what is on the new video.
The deputies’ account is, basically, as follows: on May 26, 2014, at around 9:45 in the morning, two uniformed Los Angeles Sheriff’s Deputies, Albert Murad and Jose Ruiz, were patrolling near the intersection of Long Beach Blvd. and East 69th Way when they spotted Aguilar, who was riding his bicycle northward on the sidewalk, a set of earphones covering his ears.
Wearing earphones or earbuds in both ears while operating a motor vehicle—or, as in Aguilar’s case, a bike—is a ticketable offense in California. So the deputies decided to pull Aguilar over. But, before they could do so, Aguilar reportedly glanced their direction and turned off the Long Beach Blvd. sidewalk onto East 69th Way and into an apartment complex, dumping his bike as he ran.
According to Ruiz, he and Murad exited the patrol car and followed him. Ruiz called for the runner to stop, but Aguilar did not. The passage through the apartments fed into into a blind alley at the other side of the complex. Aguilar kept going into the alley, followed by both cops.
Eventually Deputy Murad was able to get ahead of Aguilar, cut him off as he ran, and tackled him to the ground. Aguilar fell face first, his arms under him (presumably trying to break his fall). Deputy Ruiz arrived seconds later and, according to his statement, was able to put his knee on Aguilar’s right hand.
Ruiz said that Murad was able to handcuff Aguilar’s left hand, and nearly had his right hand, but Aguilar pulled it free.
Murad then yelled “Gun!” according to Ruiz, who said he believed Aguilar, their suspect, was reaching for a weapon. Ruiz pointed his own firearm at Aguilar’s stomach and said he felt Aguilar grab his gun. Murad yelled, “Gun, gun!” and Ruiz believed that Aguilar had managed to get his own gun our of his waistband, and was going to shoot Murad, so he shot at Aguilar. Then when he still felt that Aguilar was still trying to take his weapon, he shot him again. Ruiz said he attempted to fire a third time, but his service weapon didn’t fire.
Murad yelled, “I’ve been shot! I’ve been shot!” So, Ruiz cleared his weapon, chambered a bullet, and pointed the gun at Aguilar’s stomach. Seconds later, he heard Murad fire three times.
According to the coroner’s examination, Murad’s three shots hit Aguilar once in the neck and twice in the back.
Ruiz’s second bullet hit Aguilar in the leg.
A DEPUTY IS SHOT—BUT BY WHOM?
Murad’s version was similar but different at a few critical points:
According to Murad, when the two deputies were running after Aguilar, Ruiz said that Aguilar had a gun (which, in fact, he turned out to have tucked in his waistband).
After Murad tackled Aguilar, the latter’s hand was underneath his body, near his waistband, where Murad assumed there was a gun. In order to get Aguilar’s hand out, Murad said he whacked his elbow a few times hard with the butt end of his collapsable baton and then, although, Aguilar struggled to hold on to his weapon, which also got tangled in Aguilar’s boxer shorts, Murad managed to extract Aguilar’s gun, remove it, and stash it at his own beltline.
The struggle continued and, at some point in here, Murad was shot in the stomach and said he believed he was going to die. He then heard Ruiz yell “Gun,” and believed that either Aguilar had a second gun or that he had gained possession of Ruiz’s gun so, believing that Aguilar was going to shoot him a second time, he pulled his service weapon and shot Aguilar three times in rapid succession at close range.
Murad remembered handcuffing Aguilar’s left wrist, but didn’t remember when he did it due to his upset about being shot himself.
Sometime much later, Murad said, he learned that he’d not been shot by Aguilar, but by his partner, Ruiz.
WHAT DOES THE VIDEO TELL US?
The version of the video that has been made public begins when Aguilar is on the ground, face down, and both Murad and Ruiz are over him, holding him down. Murad has evidently seen Aguilar’s gun at the man’s waistband, and says so loudly to Ruiz. Then he orders Aguilar not to move, or else (albeit using more colorful phraseology).
At first, Aguilar obeys and doesn’t move, even when Murad hammers multiple times at what appears to be Aguilar’s right hand with his collapsable baton. Then smoothly, Murad grabs a gun from what is evidently Aguilar’s front waistband, and sticks it into his own waistband area. During these actions, contrary to the DA’s report, Aguilar doesn’t struggle for the gun or for anything else, but lays still.
Next, Murad attempts to handcuff Aguilar. Positioning Aguilar on his stomach, Murad successfully gets the cuff around Aguilar’s left wrist and is in the midst of handcuffing his right wrist when Aguilar, who has been limp until then, begins to struggle and breaks his right hand free. He then appearsto grab in the direction of the fence with that same right hand.
“During that handcuffing process, Mr. Aguilar broke free, and he grabbed onto one of the deputy’s guns,” Los Angeles Sheriff’s Lt. Steve Jauch said in a statement back in 2014.
But that’s not what the video shows. As Aguilar struggles clumsily, both deputies’ guns are visible. Ruiz’ gun is in his right hand but the deputy holds the weapon out to his own right, well away from Aguilar. Murad’s service weapon is in his holster, also visibly out of Aguilar’s reach.
Ruiz told investigators that Murad said the word “gun” in a manner that led him to believe that Aguilar had a gun, before Ruiz fired his first shot. Murad claimed that Ruiz shouted, “gun, gun” before he fired the three shots into Aguilar’s back and neck.
The ACLU’s Wagner describes this as a pivotal moment. But as she points out, even with repeated viewings of the new video, it does not appear that either deputy says gun in any urgent way before Ruiz fires, hitting his partner—or later before Murad fires the three successive shots from behind that will ultimately kill Aguilar.
In fact, it appears that, after firing his first shot, Ruiz asks his partner, “Do you have the gun?” At that, Murad visibly takes Aguilar’s pistol from his belt and lays it on the pavement away from Aguilar, fiddling with it to get it where he wants it, as Aguilar says repeatedly in alarm, “I didn’t shoot nobody!”
As for Aguilar grabbing for Ruiz’s gun, instead Aguilar appears to be frantically pushing he gun away from himself, while saying, “Why’d you pull a gun on me?”
By the time that Ruiz fires his second shot, which hits Aguilar in the leg, his service weapon is no longer near to Aguilar’s hand at all.
Seconds later, when Murad fires the fatal shots he appears to be holding Aguilar down by the man’s left shoulder with his own left hand, as he pulls his 9mm with his right hand and fires in rapid succession at a suspect who does not appear to pose any danger.
“If a suspect is under control,” said Wagner, “officers don’t have the authority to shoot him repeatedly.”
“CHILLING”
So what does all this mean? Aguilar’s family and their attorney state unequivocally that Aguilar was murdered by Deputy Murad. “It was an execution,” said Humberto Guizar.
Wagner makes no such judgment, but said she continues to be troubled by the video, as were other ACLU spokespeople, including executive director, Hector Villagra who, in a statement, called the video “chilling.”
In many departments, said Wagner, “the tactics officers are trained to employ often escalate rather than de-escalate situations. As a result, she said, “it’s so terrifyingly easy for an encounter to go tragically wrong.”
And if the repeated point blank shooting of a disarmed Mr. Aguilar is deemed justified, she said, “we need to ask if these are the right standards. We need to ask if these are the standards we want.”
Meanwhile, inside the LASD, while internal affairs has reportedly completed its investigation (although we don’t know what they found), their report still has to be presented to Sheriff’s Executive Force Review Committee, which will meet in January, according to a recent statement from the department. “Every aspect of a Deputy-Involved shooting is ultimately evaluated by the Sheriff’s Executive Force Review Committee, which decides whether or not there are any policy, tactical, supervisory, or training violations.”
Until then, the department urges anyone with additional information about this case, including video evidence, to contact Sheriff’s Homicide Bureau at (323) 890-5500.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We made a correction to a quote by ACLU attorney, Catherine Wagner, at 11:30 a.m, Jan. 8, 2016.
What is going on with the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office? The WHOLE world is watching.
Looks like another gangster that will not get the opportunity to fulfill his life long dream and go to medical school. A little confused as to the controversy here. An armed suspect fighting with deputies where his gun is never fully secured during the incident. The suspects own actions dictated the outcome.
These guys are still working? Oops, I forgot that the Board of Supervisors will break out the checkbook and pray that no one remembers.
Why did the District Attorney’s office “rubber stamp” their investigation with the typical “suspect grabbed officers gun” story.
Max Huntsman has his hands full.
Why is this “troubling””? All lil’ homie had to do was relax, give up his gat, get a prop 47 cite-out, use his welfare bus pass to go to court, get a free ACLU lawyer, take his slap on the wrist from a sympathetic judge and go right back to his section 8 pad, enjoy some tasty EBT dining, get high on some medical weed courtesy of Obamacare and Medi-Cal, paid for with his GR check and continue on with his liberal welfare recipient thug life of jackin’, rapin’, getting high, bustin’ caps, slingin’ dope etc., etc. instead, he decided to fight Deputy Sheriffs and chose death over his entitlement rich, worthless life. This is a wonderful and righteous thing, future lives (what do you bleeding hearts think poor lil’ homie was going to to with that evil gun?) and tax dollars were saved. Good people can sleep a little better at night, no matter how the leftist criminal lovers try to spin this. Great job deputies! They deserve a medal.
@ Good Grief: If you represent the Sheriffs Department, I can see why its going down the tube. Granted Cops have a job to do and it is never easy but your cynical and silly comments paint a vivid picture of someone who has no place in law enforcement.
Indeed, Juan. It’s called cynicism, sarcasm, trolling or whatever you like. Provocative statements made to get a rise out of people like you, who live in a PC fantasy world and embrace the liberal media’s phony war on cops narrative. You took the bait, hook, line and sinker. Sarcastic trolls are entertained by twisting small minds. So sad it has to be spelled out for you. BTW, I don’t represent LASD, just admire their good works.
Good Grief, I understand dark humor, but you’re an idiot. If you’re not retired, leave. If you are, you’ve got some buddies up in Oregon who’d be glad to have you.
Screw “Mr. Agular.” He had a gun. He fought deputies. U know what I see, lack of tactical communication between deputies is all. He didn’t relay to his partner that he recovered the gun and secured it. When Deputy 2 sees the fighting he uses deadly force based on his belief dummy still had control of a weapon. Accidentally shoots Dep 1 who believes dummy had another weapon because Dep 2 didn’t tell him he shot at stupid. So Dep 2 shoots dummy in the back. Good shooting, bad communication but don’t let a good “scandal” get in the way of the truth. And those neighbors shouting at the police, hope u never need help homies.
No offense Good Grief. You’re just another “Wood in the Forest”
“You f@ckin move b!tch and I’ll f@ckin kill you.” Reprimand the deputies for “discourtesy” and carry on. Good shoot. End of story.
#7 ..boo hoo ..waaa waaa ..Here we go with the typical progressive liberal playbook response to anything that offends your politically correct sensitivities. With your quivering lip all you can say is, “yyyyooou idiot! You racist! ” like I said, it’s so easy to twist simple minds. Now let’s get serious for a second. Two deputies are in a fight for their lives over a gun wielding gang banging piece of shit. They prevail, one is wounded, but they both go home to their families while lil’ homie is dispatched to hell. Now let’s review your comment about leaving. Really? YOU NEED TO LEAVE law enforcement and go into social work. You are a pathetic coward who would lay your partners out in the name of “social justice”. You weep for human garbage and second guess the actions of good men making split second decisions in the middle of a life and death crisis. If you ever worked patrol, then you would know that partners are all you have. The public, the brass and the media can’t wait for you to screw up, but you take their side. God forbid you work the field. Turn in your badge and go March with your cop hating BLM pals. They would love a traitor like you.
Mr. Aguilar had a gun, lied about having said gun, and fought with deputies with and in the immediate presence of said gun. He was shot because of confusion as to what was happening with his gun and because of concern he was trying to take one of the deputys’ guns. I really don’t see what the problem here is. He made his own bed. And their fear for their life and that of their partner was totally reasonable given the circumstances, and particularly multiple unsecured handguns during a fight Mr. Aguilar initiated and continued. Puh-leeeze.
By the way, if you review the tape, you can clearly see the suspects gun on the ground after being shot by Deputy Murad. Clearly in reach of the suspect and not in possession of the deputy. Deputies 1. Suspect 0. Good score in my book.
I’m always baffled how Folks get wrapped up in the issues that don’t matter, and move forward by voicing them in the worst tone possible.
The shooting is fine, but being cavalier or an imperialistic savage about how people are perceiving the situation is the problem people want law enforcement executives and criminal justice experts to deal with. Good grief thinks we should kill a day to keep the ghetto away and 10-33 forgets we aren’t at the trunk or in the locker room.
The job is dangerous and bad things are going to happen. News flash! The profession of law enforcement is not going anywhere, but it will never stop evolving. Since the 1800’s American Law dogs have been shooting folks, and society wanted accountability. If this shooting happened in Westwood, we all know they would not copy and paste the reports.
LASD, DAs Office and other LE decision makers: get some vision and some accountability about your processes or continue to be hammered in the court of public opinion.
Don’t have to be right or wrong; just consistent. Devil is in the details people at all levels.
Be safe and do the job how you see fit.
#9: Brother: post 11 applies to you as well. Sorry, but your intuition is way off. I’m definitely not white, or racist, like you. (Don’t even try to deny that “Wood” aka Peckerwood” is not a derogatory racist term against whites). I’m just sick of the leftist, PC, anti-cop, criminal loving narrative that you, the media and your ilk espouse. Unlike you, who ignorantly only see the world as black vs white, “my people” wear a badge, and we have a defined enemy known as the career “criminal” (of any race). Wake up and try getting on the right side of things, or like #7, pack it up and go march. Can’t have it both ways.
To Good Grief…….Welcome to America, specifically California. Three choices
1) Like it 2) Leave it 3) Deal with it. Look around. Don’t be alarmed or afraid. Just be aware. Im not advocating voilence nor do I condone it. Just a reminder to a simpleton such as yourself. I’m sure I’ll see you in the crowd when Donald Trump is inaugurated. LOL! Hey Bro you definitely are typical assuming that every “brother from another” is black. Dont deny it.
@14; Fair enough, Mr. Dawson. Some say perception is everything. As I stated, my provocative comments are not representative of LASD, they are my own. You on the other hand, speak eloquently, intelligently and are a fine ambassador for LASD.
While the tactical communications between the two deputies is less than stellar, the outcome was dictated by the man who initiated it: a crook with a gun. Moving past that, the standard investigation and review conducted by the department doesn’t appear to be very thorough. Given this occurred in 2014, with Homicide chock full of Tanakaites, one shouldn’t expect too much. Perhaps using seasoned investigators, and supervisors who are seasoned investigators themselves, was beyond the abilities of Interim Sheriff John Scott to ensure.
Now that the accountability movement is demanding all “i’s” are dotted and “t’s” properly crossed, it’s time to rid these units of the cigar coin holders before it’s too late.
@ Jack Dawson. Your post is ever so relevant. Hopefully the new age Cowboys and Gun Slingers catch on.
RE: Comment#10. It’s called “Verbal Judo”. Does anyone still remember the Wooo Shawwwwww! guy? Lookie, Lookie, here!
LATBG & JACK DAWSON: Spot on.
I don’t know if this was mentioned but did LASD and the DA’s office have this video while conducting their investigation or did it magically appear once the civil lawsuit (a.ka. ACLU dog and pony show) was announced? I have a hard time believing that the investigators (LASD has many highly experienced/seasoned ones) would have conducted an investigation and not addressed their discrepencies if they were germain to the their investigation and had any bearing on the deputes actions. I’m sure they had many credible and unbiased citizens to interview and get offer blow-by-blow eyewitness accounts from (sarcasm). The deputies were in a fight for their lives with an armed a confirmed armed suspect who fought with them and clearly had nothing to loose. Would this be an issue if one of the deputies had died? Their clearly seems to be an agenda by a certain group to erode law and it enforcement and an opportunistic vein to make themselves relevent.
Regarding only Comment 20: Thank you for bringing up verbal judo. Dr. George Thompson was a brilliant guy and effective rhetorician. His empirical research helped to formally identify and outline the kind of professional communication skills all great street cops/deputies use to generate lawful, voluntary compliance (in most, but not all instances). Dr. Thompson’s book and two-hour POST course was helpful, especially after the early 1990s LAPD and LBPD incidents. Given an option of being trained in two methods: Mao’s “community relations originates from the barrel of a gun” (much of the world) and Dr. Thompson’s tactical communications, the choice is obvious to all of us, no matter what the less reasonable, or even radical, anti-realist critics of American LE suggest. Thanks ‘Lookie Lookie Here’ for the brief trip down memory lane.
Although Thompson did have some valid points, he sold the County of Los Angeles “swamp land” in Florida. He became rich selling his verbal judo to different agencies. Smart man.
#23 Koestler, did you just pick pocket a nurses IPhone in the middle of your 72 Hour Observation?
@ Stuff…….LMAO!
@ Stuff, bravo, LMAO! Koestler, are you serious. All Thompson did was take LASD to a ride to the bank, and laughed the way.
Thank you, Stuff (@25), for the comment. I know of no one, no good or great police officer or sheriff’s deputy from any US LE agency, who acts contrary to any principle identified within Thompson’s formal, empirical codification of tactical communication. If you could kindly take a moment to suspend the wit, such as it is, and provide for me and the WitnessLA readership a specific principle in Thompson’s system at odds with effective law enforcement communication, I would appreciate it. If it is on point, then I will stand corrected. Yet there is no dispute I am aware of among LE practitioners, researchers, or theorists about Thompson’s intellectual contribution to the profession in this particular area. (Perhaps you can share some legitimate ones that I may have missed.) Let’s be clear: Thompson didn’t create an excellent system of communication for deputies/officers. The concept of state agents communicating effectively and treating citizens well goes back at least to the city-states of Athens and Sparta, and he merely codified what he observed. Thompson’s motivations for doing so are less interesting to me than whether it works. The best street cops I’ve seen have all used it either innately or by training and education. Sam Browne’s belts perform a function, and he likely made a small fortune (I don’t have time to look that up at the moment). We don’t critique Browne (et al.) for making a living on that work. So, many make contributions to the profession. Some of those contributions loom larger than others. LE is a communication profession: would you agree that Mao’s system of tactical communication for LE is not an option, or are one one of the Tanakists in the system?
Koestler,
Don’t get butt hurt. Just reach over and grab your Verbal Judo book off of your nightstand next to your bed, open it up and figure out a cute, quippy, witty way to turn the tide and “deflect” the criticism. Just be careful not to knock over the lava lamp, and be sure to not disturb your pet rock.
Koestler, you lack the “benefit” of having suffered through one of his classes. Woooooshah, lookie lookie here! And then you parry the verbal attack with an “Appreciate that!” Whatever value it had, at $700K in 1988 dollars was wayyyyyyy too much…
LATBG,
Were you sleeping in class? Were you hanging out with the “back row dogs”? Appreciate is an actual word that has actual meaning.
According to Thompson, you say “persheate that sir”, because that’s not even a word, and doesn’t mean anything. It’s simply a deflection.
Yes Koestler, Thompson actually said the above, and wrote “per-she-ate” on a dry erase board, and pronounced each syllable to the class to stress his “point”.
He was an intelligent man. He was a great salesman, possessing a boat load of salesmanship.
He got the LASD to pay him big bucks for his newfangled brand of snake oil. Your Sam Browne analogy is off base. His gun belt was effective and useful. Cops used it widely. Meanwhile, Verbal Judo became a running joke amongst LASD street cops.
Woooooshah, , persheate you think it’s a great thing yes I do by all means. But lookie lookie here wooooshah, let me know the next time you see or hear of a street cop using the verbiage or “lingo” Thompson actually taught in his class. I’ll buy you a new lava lamp and pet rock.
Woooooooshah how bout it sir? Lookie lookie here watchya think now? Wooooooshah!!!!
Yes, I believe the “pre-fabricated” term Thompson used was “preciate dat,” which is or would be problematic today. I’m aware of the running joke. I’m discussing the principles of Thompson’s work. Before beginning, I love the humor from the fellas and gals as the case may be. I’ve got just one more comment before moving on to the McDonnell year review above.
For the sake of argument let’s adopt the view that Dr. Thompson (now deceased) was a scoundrel, that he was a snake oil salesman, that he was the Ron Popeil of LE selling bridges and swamplands to Sheriff Block and other LE leaders desperately searching for a savior in light of the Don Jackson LBPD setup, the LAPD’s incidents, and other incidents. The $700K multiplied out proportionately was a ‘rip off’, et cetera. Let’s assume all of that.
After removing the ad hominem against Thompson (very difficult for some to do) we’re left with the actual content of his formal work (again, stripped of the bravado, awkward humor, testosterone, and hucksterism), work which has merit and is in line with the American-British traditions of LE communication going back to Sir Robert Peel (1788-1850) and his nine principles of ethical policing. Consider two of Peel’s principles:
PRINCIPLE 3: “Police must secure the willing cooperation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.”
PRINCIPLE 7: “Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
When weighed against Peel’s two principles, the practical application of Thompson’s work is imbued with merit on its own terms. (I am in no way comparing Thompson’s to Peel’s contributions, as that would be blasphemous.) Yet in a casual debate of this nature a distinction may be made between the man and the argument/work put forth by the man. Oh Well has correctly challenged part of the work: the ghettoized language, which is unnecessary and can be demeaning in many contexts. Valid criticism. But to be fair the work was deeper and more lateral than that. Not trying to spoil the fun or the payback for goods sold badly.
@ Stuff (25). With everything always being so serious and without minimizing Koestler’s comments, it’s good to get a gut busting laugh.
I burst out laughing after reading your post. People near me looked at me like I was a crazed man.
Cowboy, I suppose I should confess that Stuff’s comment had a number of my friends howling in laughter. It’s all good. There are times when I do miss the patrol car.
I believe we did not have the internet when Sgt Thompson taught his classes or we would have found out he was a phony. we called the agency he supposedly worked for and they confirmed he was a reserve who had been fired. To hear him tell it he arrested thousands of guys in a department of less than 100. He was a fraud just like Mark Lonsdale
Oh Well, my memory is not quite as good as yours – preesheat it. I was too young to qualify for back row dawg seating, but thanks for the laugh.
Koestler,
I’m not challenging the “ghettoized” language, in fact, I never considered it “ghettoized”. No more than if he advocated speaking like a Harvard professor when dealing with a pissed off suspect.
What I challenge is his premise that this was some new whiz bang miracle way of talking to people. Good street cops were talking to people effectively for generations before Thompson came up with his “Verbal Judo”.
From Dodge City in 1880 to East LA in 1980, good cops who had half a brain in their heads knew that they couldn’t fight every knucklehead they dealt with. They knew their mouth could either be their most effective tool or their biggest enemy in lots of confrontational situations.
Dr. George put a label on it. Then he put a spin on why his way was the best way and why LASD needed to pay him 700k for it. They bought it. Good for him.
Was it a wise allocation of training funds? Not in my book.
It’s doesn’t show him trying to take the Deputy gun in the video. Two in one and one officer breaking his fuckin hand with his baton how the hell he is reaching for a gun. Stop being in denial they fucked up amd it showed. Why stress a bike rider when they have real crime to fight. They set themselves up for failure not they must live up to it. I know the job is hard but we have to many fucked yo officers out there taking advantage of the badge. Let the law deal with these guys. God don’t like ugly
R u f****** kidding me look at the facts he was complying with all their COMMANDS, him being a gang member is f******* irrelevant he is a human being with a 6 month old daughter who will never have a single memory of her father because a cop decided he deserved the death penalty this should scare the hell out of you
I can’t believe it took this whole page of comments for two people who actually saw the video and comprehend what they saw to comment. I don’t know how anyone sees anything but cold blooded murder in this video, and I pray this case makes it to court and those murdering cops are convicted for the crimes they committed. Where is the outrage about this ???