good afternoon this is Daniel here with
Copwatch TV just want to welcome
everyone into our live show we're going
to break down some of the most
interesting cases in policing and this
week we really have a lot to go over
there were several different
controversial officer involved shooting
cases and in custody death cases one of
the cases that we're going to talk about
the NAACP said that this is the next
George Floyd case I promise you it's not
but we're going to go ahead and talk
about it and see what everybody thinks
about some of these cases just to make
sure that everybody is up to dat and if
you haven't already please go ahead and
subscribe to our Channel and make sure
that you go ahead and share it with
friends and family because we do this
live show not only do we put up just
incredible raw body camera video from
all across the country throughout the
week but we do this live show on Fridays
usually around 12:00 mountain time and
the one of the most important things
that we like is to get as many people in
here as possible so we can go ahead and
have a discussion about some of these
cases because if you can imagine a lot
of the times people or fans watching
these cases they may have extra
information that maybe we don't have
here or they may have a different
opinion and it's really that debate that
dialogue that's one of the most
interesting things that we like to talk
about here on these controversial cases
um want to welcome everybody in we got
uh let's see Canton Hall of Fame shame
uh from Ohio we have uh uh Victor is in
from Florida we have Amanda is in from
Atlanta Georgia we have Manitoba Canada
and Dorset in the UK and Patricia from
Alexander City Alabama well Patricia one
of the cases that we're going to talk
about today did take place in Alabama it
seems like we don't have a whole lot of
cases from Alabama but definitely one of
the controversial ones that we're going
to talk about today is from Alabama so
uh definitely let us know if you have
any extra information there because you
are local in that state all right I hope
that everyone had a great Thanksgiving
again we were off last week and kind of
like I've talked about before my wife is
from a small town in South Dakota we go
back there for um some holidays and you
over the last couple years um I've
gotten stopped uh I think I've been
stopped four different times in that
small town driving around um I did let
you guys know and tell you if I did get
pulled over I didn't this time I thought
I was going to we were driving back from
the gym at about 2:00 in the morning and
we did pass a police officer and
intersection that I always get pulled
over in or at least three of the times
I've been pulled over in did not get
stopped this time so I don't have any
stories um if if I did get pulled over I
was going to try to request the body
camera footage but that did not happen
this time but I do hope that everyone
had a great Thanksgiving um because we
were talking a second ago about just
having an honest dialogue about a lot of
these cases one of the things that I did
and I think that a lot of people did
over the break is you know watch
different shows and channels on on
YouTube and on Facebook because my my
guess is if you're interested in this
type of content that you watch more than
just police body camera camera video
well one of the things that we've been
watching lately over here is a lot of
First Amendment auditor videos and you
know it's one of those things where it's
like there is a pretty Stark difference
in the quality of the different First
Amendment Auditors and you really don't
know what a bad auditor looks like until
you see a good auditor and one of the
good Auditors that I want to give a
shout out to is Jason over at amaganset
press and his son Ben over at watching
the Watchmen they are really good
Auditors and here's why is because their
goal when they go into this is to have
an honest conversation and a dialogue
and sometimes educate people not just
citizens on the streets but also police
officers I I really appreciate that and
I really like their style and I think
that they really do a good job when it
comes to auditing so we're going to go
ahead and extend an invitation to either
Ben or Jason over at amaga press or uh
uh or Ben over at watching The Watchman
that we think it would be interesting
and a good idea if you guys wanted to
come on and maybe do a live podcast here
over on our Channel and really discuss
some of these issues not just some of
the things that you guys have been
through but also talking about some of
the other other Auditors you know I'm
really curious because you know again
one of the things that I think are
interesting is that I watch these body
camera videos and because of my police
experience and and the my my law degree
I can look at a body camera video and I
can say I think the police officer did
correct this is why and then I can point
to law or policy or training so I'm
curious can these first amendment
Auditors you know like like Jason and
Ben can they look at a case and say or
look at a a First Amendment auditor and
see okay they they did this right they
did this wrong I like that style I don't
like that style that's an interesting
conversation that I don't think has been
had yet so want to extend that
invitation out to either Jason or Ben um
we do love your guys work all right so
the first case that we're going to get
into today is uh a case it's it's a
tragic case it's an awful case out of
Cortez colado Cortez Colorado that is in
Southwest Colorado you know not far
probably you know within 30 or 40
minutes from Durango so this happened on
Wednesday of this past week Sergeant
Michael Moran of the Cortez Colorado
Police Department um he initiated a
traffic stop on a vehicle uh the reason
for the traffic stop that's been given
was reckless driving um we don't have a
whole lot of information yet about
exactly how this occurred we don't know
we don't know if there are uh if there
is any body camera video yet or
surveillance videos we haven't seen them
yet so all we have is basically the
reports from the chief of police about
what happened is is as sergeant Moran
did the traffic stop he made contact
with the driver and as he was making
contact with the driver he was fired
upon by by the offender and he died
there on scene um pretty much as soon as
that as that happened um Law Enforcement
Officers with the montazuma county
sheriff's office um they responded to
the scene with other members of the
Cortez Colorado Police Department they
were able to locate the suspect it was
initi called out that there were two
suspects or offenders in the vehicle um
it sounds like there was one individual
who did the shooting and then the other
individual who didn't do the shooting
but was in the car he ran in a different
direction police officers were able to
locate um the offender of of the of the
murder of of off of Sergeant Moran over
at a storage business uh less than two
miles from the side of the traffic stop
um you know B basically the the chief of
police said that um the suspect engaged
police officers police officers fired
back and they eliminated the threat so
essentially the offender was killed by
police officers um what they are
reporting is that this all happened
pretty quickly so essentially within
minutes of murdering that police officer
um uh the police Sergeant Moran uh the
offender didn't get into a gunfight with
other police officers and thankfully
that offender lost that particular um
that particular battle um police have
not identified the offender um and they
also haven't talked about a motive so
it's unknown that if this was an
individual who was mentally ill or was
he wanted for a murder charge did he
have a felony warrant was he on
probation or parole there was was there
stolen merchandise in the car so they
really haven't given any of that
information yet but we can assume that
is that is coming soon um a couple
thoughts on on on this case it's just
important to remember that traffic stops
are one of the most dangerous activities
for police officers statistically they
are one of the most dangerous things
that police officers can do and this is
for a couple reasons it's because as a
police officer you never know who's in
the car you never know what crime they
just just committed and you never know
how desperate someone might be to get
away all police officers know that this
is a possibility that you might die in
the line of duty that you might die in
the line of duty at any time you put on
the uniform however still police
officers still go out there and they
work and and and they they take calls
for service and they do traffic stops
knowing that and incidents tragedies
like this are a blunt reminder that
there is a dark reality that's always
lurking out there for for police
officers uh I just want to say rest in
peace to Sergeant Moran and we get more
information about this case we will um a
little bit more about traffic stops
being dangerous you know to Timothy
McVey the Oklahoma City bomber he was
stopped on a traffic stop uh uh Darien
uh Jarrett um from New Mexico State
Police he was killed on on a traffic
stop um uh Daniel Webster from the
Albuquerque Police Department um he was
killed on a traffic stop and I've had
several other friends um who have been
involved in shootings and who have been
who have been shot and injured and the
majority of those cases have been on um
have been on um traffic stop so um uh I
know the sergeant Moran he was uh nine
years he had on the department um he was
uh in the Marine Corps before that he
did two tours in Iraq and he leaves
behind two daughters so it's an
unbelievably sad and uh tragic case and
uh he's also a can9 Handler and um the
more information that we get about this
case we'll go ahead and and update you
but the the offender has uh has died in
a shootout with with police directly
after um all right so the next case that
I I want to talk about and this is a
this is a controversial officer involved
shooting case and I know that some of
the criticism that I get which is good I
love the criticism is that I only cover
cases where I say the police officer did
the right thing or I always say kind of
like a reflex that police officers
always did the right thing well that OB
if you watch this show which we want
people to watch the show so make sure
you follow the channel and go ahead and
and share it with friends and family but
what I I also do is I also talk about
cases where I definitely have questions
about what the police officer did and
and I'm really interested to see was
this a legal officer involved shooting
and we actually have one of those cases
it's a questionable officer involved
shooting that happened in Las crusis new
New Mexico last month um uh but this is
a case that I want to talk about and the
reason why we're talking about it now is
one there's a lot of cases to go through
but the body camera footage for this
case um pretty much just came out we're
just able to see exactly what happened
so I'm going to tell you what happened
in this case I'm going to tell you what
happened in this case I'm going to give
you my opinions of it I'm going to let
you know what I think some of the really
obvious issues are in this case and I'm
really curious to see what your thoughts
are as well I know that we have a lot of
people in this chat like Sergeant George
who have a whole lot of experience and
um and and and education on these issues
really C see what they have to say so
this happened on October 3rd of this
past year and L cruus New Mexico um
that's a town in Southern New Mexico not
far from El Paso um so police officer
Felipe hernandz he was a bike patrol
officer he was on bike Patrol he
detained an individual named Teresa
Gomez she's a 45-year old woman that's
pretty much how this started so um
officer Hernandez he is on bike Patrol
he's actually riding on a bike and he
makes contact with Miss Gomez now miss
Gomez she's in a vehicle in the driver's
seat of the vehicle and she's parked on
the property of a public housing complex
so this is you know state government
property because it's a public housing
uh public housing complex but there are
some rules most of the time those rules
we'll get into this those rules on
public housing um usually it's the
people who actually live there those are
the ones who have to follow that rule so
at this time the officer doesn't know if
Miss Gomez actually lives there or not
however she does have a a male passenger
in the passenger seat of the car his
name is uh Jesus uh Jesus Garcia and the
officer seemed to recognize him because
indicated that he already had some type
of a criminal trespass notice where he
wasn't supposed to be on there so um
basically here's what happens the police
officer makes contact with the two
individuals um you know he he
essentially stops them even though he's
on a bike um and he tells Miss Garcia
that essentially she's trespassing that
she's not allowed to be there now miss
miss I'm Sorry Miss Gomez now miss Gomez
doesn't necessarily agree and she isn't
all that Cooperative essentially she's
asking questions to the police officer
that really aren't that reasonable she's
saying well you know I didn't know I
wasn't supposed to be here you know I
thought this was like you know a public
parking lot I didn't know I wasn't
supposed to be here I'm willing to leave
I don't think that I committed a crime
and these are the types of things that
she's saying which again AR aren't
unreasonable um but however the police
officer he isn't letting her go he wants
her information so he does have Miss
Gomez step out of the vehicle and she
does give him some information but she
lies about her name so she does give the
police officer the wrong name now
because he's on a bike it's not like
he's in his car where he could just type
her name into the system and run her and
stuff like that so what the officer has
to do is he has to write all this stuff
down by hand so the officer and uh Miss
Gomez they do go back and forth during
this I think it's important to know that
during this the officer does use for
lack of a better term colorful language
so the police officer utilizes colorful
language he he does swear at Miss Gomez
and and to be honest as transparent as I
could be it seems like The Language by
the police officer is a little
unnecessary so the idea that the that
the officer unnecessarily escalated this
situation like that isn't an
unreasonable thing to think or to look
at or for someone like Internal Affairs
to investigate because that's part of
this case you know a lot of times police
officers ERS that have policies where
they're not supposed to use derogatory
language at individuals that they're
dealing with here's what I mean by this
let's say someone has a gun if a police
officer yells drop the [ __ ] gun well
that's not a big deal right that's not a
big deal it shouldn't be a big deal
police officers shouldn't get in trouble
for that now if you direct the language
towards someone saying you're a [ __ ]
idiot or something like that yes I could
see police departments having a policy
essentially not wanting police officers
to talk like that but that's different
see so in his his conversation with her
was more of the second one which you
know it it didn't seem like he wasn't
just saying it using curse words as as
like as like an an an adjective it
definitely seemed like it was being
directed towards Miss Gomez so that
could have escalated the situation
that's definitely what her family
attorney is saying so she she gives the
police officer the incorrect information
he's writing it down he really doesn't
know it's incorrect information though
because again he hasn't typed into the
computer he hasn't called over to to
dispatch to run her through ncic and
then stepping out of the vehicle he he
tells her to get back in inside of the
vehicle you know presumably so he can go
ahead and run her name and stuff like
that and just is still keep her there on
scene so he has her sit back inside
inside that vehicle um she's in the
driver's seat of the car he's standing
pretty much right there in the well for
lack of a better term right there in the
well right there in the well of the of
the driver's side and the doors open
well it's at that point that Miss Gomez
decides that she's going to flee the
scene the way that she flees the scene
is she actually reverses the car in
order to leave but the way the car was
parked she couldn't just go forward she
had to reverse before she went forward
now when she reversed and she didn't
reversed quickly but she definitely
reversed now again because the police
officer is standing there right by the
driver's side door as she reversed the
driver's side door did strike the
officer as she went back in Reverse now
the officer was able to stay on his feet
and she only reversed a little bit so
the door let's be clear the door does
strike the officer he stays on his feet
though but again that would startle
anyone because imagine being a police
officer in that moment like we can look
at it from 2020 hindsight and I can sit
here in the comfort of this really nice
studio with these awesome patches behind
me and I can sit here and say well okay
I I know that the officer isn't going to
get dragged or killed or run over
because you know I'm watching this from
the comfort of of of this studio however
being the officer in the moment you
don't know that you don't have that
luxury so the officer in the moment as
the car is coming back all it would take
is for her to hit the gas a little bit
further and now he's under the car he's
run over he's being dragged and maybe
he's even being killed by or murdered by
that act so so again it's easier for us
to look at it from this side what we
should look at it is also considered
what was the police officer thinking in
the moment so thankfully she reversed
only a little bit the door does strike
him um but again he's able to stay on
his feet then she proceeds forward as
she proceeds forward she starts to drive
away from the police officer so now
objectively if we're just looking at
this a objective and honest as the car
is driving forward yes she committed a
crime um you know she tried to strike
the officer even if we take that to the
extreme maybe that would be aggravated
battery aggravated assault you know
hitting someone with your car door could
that be a felony crime sure absolutely
it could be but now she's leaving she's
driving away from the police officer
it's at that point so in the the time
gap between when she strikes the officer
and then when she's driving away it's
it's about 2 seconds as she's driving
away from the police officer not like at
a high rate of speed at a pretty slow
rate of speed that's when the police
officer draws out his firearm and he
starts shooting at the driver's side of
the vehicle the the the rounds that he
fires do strike Miss Gomez the car
crashes um she ends up uh uh dying from
her injuries she did sustain fatal
injuries um so now uh you
know obviously this case is you know
it's pretty controversial in Los crusis
new New Mexico um her family wants the
officer charged
um and that's pretty much what we have
going on so I'm really I'm really
curious to see what you guys think about
that case and um you know I have I have
um I have uh a couple a couple thoughts
on this case and um you know some of my
thought initial thoughts or issues with
this case are you know I always say was
there Reasonable Suspicion to to uh uh
detain in this case and you know before
I I say that let let me tell you what
the chief of police of Los crus New
Mexico said he said you when he's
talking about the body camera video he
says you'll see things that are hard to
watch and hear the officer speaking way
that is difficult to listen to so it
seems like the the chief of police you
know pretty much acknowledges as the
body camera footage come out that you're
going to hear language from this police
officer and it's not going to be great
so um you know at least the I should
just say that he is an interim uh police
chief so at least he was you know pretty
transparent um with it that you're not
going to hear great language now what I
should say is not great language even a
violation of Department policy when it
comes to language on behalf of police
that isn't equal to you know committing
a violent felony trying to trying to run
from police or trying to um you know or
striking a police officer those two
aren't equal okay obviously committing
the felony running from police isn't
equivalent to you know the police
officer speaking B police officer
cursing that's a policy violation maybe
it's a written reprimand I doubt it
would even be a day off so that's what
that's what we're dealing with here so
my first issue with this case is was
there Reasonable Suspicion to detain
this is something I talk about all the
time so again the way I look at use of
force cases when I'm evaluating them um
you know on on in this in this context
is I really put a lot into was there
Reasonable Suspicion for the police
officer to detain the individual was
there probable cause because if there
wasn't if there was no legal reason for
the police officer to detain the person
in the first place and then if a use of
force happen later I'm going to be
pretty harsh on that officer because I'm
going to say that officer never should
have been in that position in the first
place there was no legal reason to
detain now if there is a legal reason to
detain and police officers have
Reasonable Suspicion probable cause and
then there's a fight and there you are
in a fight you you are in a fight with
someone who's trying to get away I give
police officers a pretty decent amount
of leeway when it comes to the use of
force they leave if they have if what
they're doing is within the law that's
just my personal opinion that's how I
see these cases I'm extremely harsh on
the officers when it comes to Reasonable
Suspicion probable cause but when it
comes to an active fight in the street
with someone trying to get away I do
give police officers a little more
leeway there you may disagree but that's
how I honestly feel about these cases so
was there Reasonable Suspicion to detain
and the thing is is I I I don't I I have
I have a question about that so so you
know why did the police officer stop her
in the first place well because she was
on she was as she was there after hours
on public housing property okay is that
a violation of law well it might be a
violation of policy if you're a resident
there but is that a violation of law are
there signs posted saying that unless
you live here you can't be in this
parking lot past 900 p.m. this Miss
Gomez did Miss Gomez passed though so so
if that's if that's an actual
trespassing for again again for for for
people who don't live there then I guess
there would be reasonable suspicion but
my understanding is typically when it
comes these housing these housing
programs is that you know the rules are
there for the people who live there and
if you violate those rules it's not
necessarily criminal it's that you know
maybe the government can take away that
that benefit that they're that they are
giving to you with public housing you
you can't have all kinds of friends over
um you know at 11:00 p.m. on public
housing well the friends can't get in
trouble for that right but the person
who is the resident there they can get
in trouble for that when I say trouble I
don't necessarily mean legal trouble I
mean again they maybe they would take
away that government benefits so I I
actually think it's it's it's it's it's
pretty thin Reasonable Suspicion so um
without knowing whether or not um there
was actually a sign or or anything like
this and boom news says she was giving a
warning to leave she should have been
allowed to leave alive yeah I boom news
I I agree so so let's say that it's so
is as questionable as this is um I could
see a police officer going up there
making contacts and hey this is a public
housing thing I don't know if you guys
live here or not but listen you you need
you need you need to leave now this guy
was a bike officer and we know that bike
officers typically um you know they are
more proactive when it comes to uh uh
Patrol they obviously because they're in
a bike they can't pursue um uh they
can't pursue a a vehicle if a if a
vehicle runs or anything like that um
but bike officers are typically more
proactive more proactive officers um he
he could have I mean if the car ran from
him he could have called it out over the
radio that they were fleeing like these
are the kinds of things that the officer
could have done besides using Force so
okay so we have that I I honestly like I
said I think that there's thin
Reasonable Suspicion should can the
officer make contact sure can the but
the officer probably should have
illegally and probably just common sense
just told them to leave trying to detain
them um it doesn't make a whole lot of
sense I think that's thin Reasonable
Suspicion to detain I'm not a fan of it
that being said everything that comes
after it I'm going to be a little
harsher on because I don't love the
Reasonable Suspicion I don't really
think there was reasonable suspicion
that a crime had been committed okay and
again the police officer did use
demeaning and file language during the
contract contact did that unnecessarily
escalate the situation maybe I mean it's
possible um I mean it's it's it's
possible that that did again that's a
policy violation that's not a legal
violation um so uh boom news says
proactive equals aggressive I disagree
um proactive isn't doesn't necessarily
um equal equal um aggressive at all um
proactive policing is uh traffic stops
um so so I don't I don't think that
necessarily equal now proactive policing
can be aggressive um and aggressive
policing can be legal what I'm concerned
about is is the policing constitutional
and within the law that's what I'm
that's what I'm I am concerned with
especially in high crime neighborhoods
because if the goal is to lower crime
and save lives that's what you want
police officers to do now was the use of
force objectively reasonable um again
2020 hindsight indicates that the
officer was technically out of danger as
he started to fire right because I I I
think here's what I'm comfortable to say
is that as the vehicle is hitting him as
he's being struck by the vehicle with
the risk of being dragged under the
vehicle or or run over yes that's a
deadly force situation I don't think
there's any question there um that that
would be a deadly force situation so
where I'm going with this is let's say
instead of instead of driving like she
did backwards for you know maybe a
second a second and a half let's say she
drives backwards and the police officer
gets hung up in the door for 2 3 4 5
seconds and the officer knows that all
she has to do is tap a little bit more
on the gas and I'm dead that's instant
that's a deadly force situation to me
there is absolutely no doubt about that
now once the car is going forward no
longer pointed towards the officer he's
not inside that well of the door that's
not a deadly force situation meaning
that the officer is no longer in
imminent threat of death or great bodily
injury so we have to think okay we had a
deadly force situation and then two
seconds later when the officer actually
fired that there wasn't a deadly force
situation in where well well how can
that happen well we know that police
officers aren't robots so I know anti-
police activists are going to expect
police officers to be 100% perfect but
that we know that that isn't the case
right that we know how the human brain
works we know that when something
happens you know your brain doesn't talk
to your body to make you react instantly
like that isn't that absolutely isn't
how it happened right um that absolutely
isn't how it happens you know so there's
some there is some reactionary Gap now
is that reactionary Gap a third of a
second is it 1 second is it a second for
me and maybe a second and a half for the
officer here you know that's hard to say
so if we look at it this way again from
the time that he was there was an an
objective deadly force situation where
he could have used deadly force to when
he actually fires again that's about a
two second Gap so you have to think
about this way how does the human brain
work so the office processes a deadly
force situation he draws his gun how
long does it take an officer to draw a
gun draw a gun and fire is typically
around a second that's how long it takes
so in the officer so think about it this
way so the officer is in a deadly force
situation and the officer recognizes
that makes the decision that he's going
to draw on fire that takes about a
second so by the time it's kind of like
you have to look at it this way you you
seen these videos you see I think a lot
of people watch baseball you've seen
these things where a short stop is about
to throw a ball over to the first
baseman but there's a runner right in
front of them and the the short stop
doesn't realize the runner is right in
front of them until right before the
short stop is about to throw and the
short stop ends up nailing the runner in
the chest you can see these videos all
the time well no one ever asks like well
why did the short stop well I mean right
before the sh Short Stop threw the ball
he could see that the runner was there
but you're already in the motion of
doing it your brain has already made the
decision it's literally physically
impossible to stop something so that
that does happen with use of force cases
so you know I would say since we know
that it takes you know approximately a
second to draw on fire well the officer
made the decision a second to draw on
fire like again so how unreasonable is
it again I don't I don't love it I think
it's questionable um but again if we're
thinking about how does this kind of
stuff happen well this is how it happens
now let's say there was a 5 Second Gap a
3 second Gap a 4 second Gap what I say
that that is completely out of where it
would be reasonable for the officer to
fire yes 2 seconds I'm going to say I
think this one is close but I think it's
probably not re an objectively
reasonable officer involved shooting so
um I I guess we couldn't get more
information I'm really here curious to
see um what other people think about
this case um Patricia watt says true he
was no longer in immediate harm yeah
Patricia I agree so he was no longer in
immediate harm and there was about a two
second Gap like I said if it was a
1second gap I would honestly say you you
know what um uh you know what um I I I'm
not I I'm not sure about that because
you make the decision it takes about a
second for that to that decision to to
come into actual action um uh kanton
Hall of Shame says uh where that
qualified immunity comes into play not
really Canton this has nothing to do
with qualified immunity couple things on
that Canton because qualified immunity
only is protection for officers for
civil lawsuits so if you want to sue the
officer personally that's where
qualified IM comes into play and
officers only get the qualified immunity
if they didn't violate any rights so
qualified immunity has nothing to do
with the officer being fired has nothing
to do with the officer being prosecuted
it's only the officer being personally
sued and again qualified immunity is
only a defense if the officer did not
violate any constitutional rights so um
I I I appreciate that Canton but I'm
just just for little education that
qualified immunity absolutely has
nothing nothing to do with this so so
when I look at this shooting um from the
the body camera footage I'm able to see
it does not look like this is an
objectively reasonable shooting um and
then as we go back further I don't think
that there was any reasonable suspicion
for the officer oh yeah of course kanton
um I I don't think there was any
reasonable suspicion for the officer to
detain um Miss Gomez in the first place
so I think that this case is problematic
now Las cruus New Mexico did have an
officer involved shooting not that long
ago that we covered it was the one with
a Presley easy um he was the individual
who was fighting with with a police
officer um officer Lunsford and during
the fight the officer tried to tase him
Presley easy grabbed the officer's taser
and the officer did utilize deadly force
that is absolutely 100% a deadly force
situation so that officer officer lunr
he's actually being prosecuted right now
and he's being charged that that is in
the same city with the same da in Las
cruas New Mexico that case is 100%
lawful reasonable Justified and it isn't
close and the prosecuting the officer
this one is questionable to objectively
not reasonable so because it's the same
the same situation and the and the same
and the same day my guess is that the
officer um will be charged in this case
um this case as well um I should say
that is uh attorney general uh rul
Torres the Attorney General of of New
Mexico um he is the one uh who is
Prosecuting the officer Lunsford in the
Presley easy case it's not the local da
it's it's it's the Attorney General um
so I I I should have said that it's not
the local da it is the Attorney General
of of of of new new New Mexico he's a
Geor Soros um uh uh funded prosecutor um
okay so the the the next case I want to
talk about and this is a this is a
pretty uh controversial case um the boom
news says that town has some outof
control cops fire them all well that
doesn't make a whole lot of sense to
fire all the police officers um
especially if they didn't do anything
wrong so boom news if you fire police
officers who didn't do anything wrong
and you have no basis to fire them all
of those so L crues New Mexico has what
maybe 100 cops 80 cops 120 cops I don't
know what what will happen boom news is
if you just go ahead and fire all of the
police officers um essentially without a
legal reason to do so every police
officer will will F will will sue the
will sue the city for their their job
back not only will they all get their
jobs back they will all get back pay so
if you keep them out of work for a year
and a half that's probably
$120,000 so uh if you want to give all
police officers a year and a half off
$120,000 and their job back again you're
really helping out a whole bunch of cops
they're just saying that's what happens
if you fire police officers without a
legal reason to do so they're going to
sue to get their job back as they
absolutely should now if a police
officer commits a crime they absolutely
should be fired I have no um no no um
issue with that at all um cute bug says
stop pulling people over for victimless
crimes to make more money you know this
is a case that's this is I I appreciate
the comment cute bug this is a this is
something that i' I've talked about a
whole lot lately
um stop pulling over for victimless
crimes um so again so and you could
definitely put your opinions in this
here's how I feel about this is that if
you're going to be mad about what the
law is so victimless crime so so I'm I'm
a Libertarian at heart um so I honestly
even though you know almost two decades
experience as a police officer I
honestly think that there's too many
laws and I don't like so like like what
you said cute bug these victimless
crimes um that police officers should
stop pulling people over for I'm I'm
going to agree I'm going to agree with
that but I'm going to agree with that is
that if you don't want it to be illegal
the fix isn't with the local police
officers okay that's not where the fix
it the fix is with the lawmakers so the
lawmakers the politicians and then the
politicians who manage and run the
police departments that's who's at fault
the idea of of let giving the lawmakers
who write the laws who let's say there's
all these victimless crimes they could
get rid of all of the the victimless
crimes essentially so they're not that
activity isn't illegal anymore they
could do it in one legislative session
so you're giving them a pass then the
politicians who run the police
departments who are telling the police
officers hey you have to do this you
have to do that and those people are
elected by the citizens okay so those
people are elected by the citizens to
run the police department they tell the
police officers what to do um so you're
giving them a pass and the police
officers at the very bottom who are like
hey I'm just trying to keep the keep the
community safe I didn't write these laws
I'm not the one in charge this
department who's saying I have to go
ahead and enforce these laws like I'm
I'm I'm just here trying to make to make
the community safe I'm not elected to
determine whether or not things are
legal or or or or or or not legal and
and and to to blame the police officers
at the very bottom that's either a
pretty bad
misunderstanding um that's pretty that's
a pretty bad misunderstanding of of how
the system actually works or you're just
an anti- police activist you're looking
for any reason uh to go after police
officers
um I I I should say that when it comes
to police officers that yes um city and
counties do have legal Representatives
on staff where police officers can call
but they're not always available 24/7 so
police officers can always go ahead and
call an attorney if they need um if they
need any help um DaVinci says Sheriff
are elected by the people and uh police
are appointed by the Mayors yeah that
that that's a really good question D
Vinci yeah so a sheriff is elected um a
sheriff is elected um and they have
basically they're elected on that um on
on that job boom news I'm anti-bad
police too which is why I covered the
the the case I just covered um so it
it's yes so sheriffs are I I prefer the
sheriff model to the police chief model
um I wrote an article about that um last
year um and actually went on a podcast
with Travis Yates called courageous
leadership where went ahead and talk
talked all all all about that um but
yeah but police Chiefs are pointed by
the mayor so a police chief is
essentially only as good as the mayor is
because the you know the mayor um
basically tells the police chief what to
do which is reasonable because again the
mayor was the one who was elected by the
voters um okay so we're going to get
into this next case this is a
controversial case and the body camera
footage again just came out for this
case it happened on August 10th 2023 um
I don't love this case and I've got some
issues with it but I'm really again
really curious to see what you all have
to say about this so this one happened
on August 10th of 2023 62-year-old guy
named Johnny Hollman um he died in
police custody in Atlanta Georgia um and
again the body camera footage uh the
body camera footage just came out on
this case so essentially what happened
is 62-year-old Mr hman um they've
they've put in the media that he was a
deacon I think they said he was actually
leaving a church function that isn't
that relevant but that's all over the
news and maybe maybe when I say that he
was a deacon leaving a church function
maybe that'll trigger something in in
you guys watching to say oh okay I
recognize that case because that's how
they always preface it okay I don't
think it's relevant but the mainstream
media does so again maybe that'll
trigger trigger Tri this case for you so
Johnny Hollman he he was driving a
deacon driving 62-year-old driving back
from some kind of a church function he
was involved in a traffic crash um he
was involved in a traffic crash a former
Atlanta police officer uh Kieran Kimbro
he responded to that traffic crash and
he did an investigation his
investigation found that he believed
that Mr hullman was at fault for the
traffic crash so he did what most police
officers doing a situation like this he
wrote a traffic ticket he wrote Mr hman
a traffic citation now part of that
process is to have Mr Hollman sign that
traffic citation now in Atlanta Georgia
just like in most places signing a
traffic ticket isn't an admission of
guilt signing the traffic ticket isn't
you saying hey I'm guilty of this I
agree no all it is saying is hey you
know this is a criminal offense or it's
under the the the the traffic code and
you signing it is basically um a promise
that you're going to show up to court
now you might think to yourself well
that's stupid like why do you even have
to sign this well again let's think
about when a lot of these laws were made
in the ' 70s ' 80s or '90s imagine you
can imagine a situation where you get a
yeah Canton says sign and have your day
in court I agree Canton so imagine a
situation where I'm driving along in
that little town in South Dakota where I
always get pulled over in with with my
wife and let's say a police officer
gives me a ticket let's say I don't sign
anything he gives he gives me that
ticket and there there's a court date
let's say I show up that court date and
go it wasn't me I'm not the one who was
driving I the proof to me that I was the
one who was driving so that is why these
laws went into effect so there's some
kind of a signature on there to say yes
Dan was the one who was driving here's
his signature we can verify it he was
the one who was actually issued that
ticket um boom news says why is it a
policy to sign a ticket it escalates a
stressful situation I'm going to explain
to you boom news so so so it essentially
that was why a lot of these laws were
created so basically when you go to
court say 6 weeks a month or two months
later the person can't say the person
can't I know boom news I'm getting there
the person can't say um hey it wasn't me
who was driving okay so I I under that
theory I I can see why law I'm not
trying to defend lawmakers and again
police officers are not the ones who
create these laws so if you have a
problem with it and I get you having a
problem with it it's with not only with
the lawmakers but then it's with the
people who write policies the managers
of police departments not the cops
themselves okay so I get why these laws
were implemented in the first place it's
not unreasonable but now here we are
okay here we are in 2023 if Mr Hollman
refused to sign and the cop said all
right cool well here's your court dat
I'll I'll I'll I'll see you in court
it's not like Mr Hollman could get to
court and say hey it wasn't me or if a
warrant is issued because doesn't show
he goes well I didn't know about it I
was never given a a given a given a
citation so you know also signing it is
also proof or an acknowledgement that
hey I got this ticket I know I have to
go to court because if you don't go to
court you're going to get a warrant well
now 80% of police departments have body
camera footage where they record all
traffic stop so the idea that we
actually have to sign a ticket to prove
that it was me is a little ridiculous I
think I agree with boom news that it's
that it that it's outdated that it needs
to be updated that's why I was actually
going with this boom news so thank you
for putting that comment in there first
we are thinking about this correctly so
yes the laws need to be updated because
it doesn't make any sense could this
escalate something sure now I'm to be
honest with you uh you know being a
being a police officer I spent 15 years
in uniform 10 10 years on the street
taking calls for service um almost five
years in DWI unit where all I did was
traffic stops all night long and take
drunk drivers to jail but I issued a lot
of traffic stops too so I made you know
somewhere between two and 3,000 drunk
driving arrests given thousands of
traffic tickets and okay and this is in
a in a pretty big city and what I can
say is in all of that time in thousands
of traffic stops tens of thousands of
ticket there there was one time one time
where someone refused to sign a ticket
so again it doesn't happen all that
often now there are times when people
would say things like this is my
experience but I know I'm not the only
one or people would say things like I'm
not signing that I didn't do anything
wrong and I would say Hey listen I I I
get it you're going to have your day in
court so you sign this ticket is is not
an admission of guilt it's just saying
that you're going to show up to court
and it verifies that you're the one who
gave the ticket so you can't later on
and say that it wasn't you now when I
explain that in a normal reasonable and
calm manner
99.9% of the people go oh okay cool I'll
see you in court dude and I go all right
I'll I'll see you there too maybe if if
if I go right so that's typically how it
goes I had one person in again in in 15
years of being on the street refusing to
sign a ticket you know I gave them
chance after chance after chance so I
had to arrest them Not only was that the
law but that was my Police Department
policy I didn't have a choice so we
can't say hey we want police officers to
follow the policies well I did follow
the policy one time you know in
thousands and thousands of traffic St
someone absolutely refused and gave me
no choice to take them to jail now
listen as a police officer working on
the streets what do you think I would
rather do do you think I would rather
write the person the ticket and then go
hang out with my friends take another
call make another traffic stuff or do
you think I want to so if you're not
going to sign a ticket you're probably
an [ __ ] right so do you think I want
to spend an extra one hour two hours
three hours do extra paperwork spending
an extra three hours with an [ __ ] in
the back of my car no not what I'm
looking to do as a police officer so
again most police officers not trying to
get people to not sign the ticket they
want to write you the ticket and go away
and they'll see you in court that's what
most police officers want okay no police
officer says you know what I would like
to do ah you know what [ __ ] seems
like a good idea this guy this real
[ __ ] [ __ ] I just can't I want to
spend as much time with him as possible
no cop ever says that okay that's
absolutely insane um so where I'm going
with this is that in this case um the
officer officer Kimbro did try to get Mr
Hollman to sign the ticket Mr Hollman
wouldn't sign the ticket they went back
and forth for about 15 minutes it's all
on body camera footage where officer
Kimbro he explains this pretty
reasonably he says Hey like listen it's
not saying you're guilty it's just
saying that you're going to show up to
court um you're not admitting any any of
your guilt I'm gon to give you a copy of
it like he went through all this and
then finally Officer kimra says like
listen dude like if you don't sign the
ticket I'm going to um I'm if you don't
sign the ticket I'm going to if you
don't sign the ticket I'm going to have
to take you to jail I don't want to take
you to jail I'm going to have to you're
not leaving me any choice Mr Helman
still refused this Deacon he still
refused to sign the ticket which again
is stubborn and it's ridiculous and it's
stupid it's idiotic to be just
completely honest he still refuses to
sign the ticket so at that point officer
Kim brro says okay you're under arrest
turn around place your hands behind your
back Mr hullman refuses uh refuses to
put his hands behind his back he resists
arrest he he pushes the officer the
officer ends up taking him down to the
ground once on the ground he's still
fighting with the officer the officer is
trying to get his hands behind his back
back but he's got his hands curled up
like this listen I'm I'm going to tell
you something right here if even if
you're even if you're bigger younger
stronger than the individual who you're
trying to get under arrest when someone
puts their hands below their below their
chest and they're on the ground and
they're holding it in you could be the
biggest strongest guy it's difficult to
move someone's hands it's much easier to
pull your hands in than to try to pull
someone's hands out especially if you're
not trying to hurt them you know it's
it's basically like a toddler holding on
to something right it's like yes you
could just smash him in the head and
overpower him but you're not going to do
that to a toddler right so it's like you
don't want to do that to a 62y old man
so while the officer is you know this
younger officer is wrestling with Mr
hman on the ground and he's like this
holding his arms and not giving his arms
again just cooperate fight it in court
sign the goddamn ticket right anyways so
uh there's a tow truck driver who had
who's in the neighborhood and happens to
see what's going on he decides to help
what the tow truck driver does he helps
the officer restrain and subdue Mr h
with the intent to get Mr hman into
custody um with the intent to get Mr Mr
hman into custody um during this Mr hman
was tased two different times he was
tased in Drive stun uh uh in in the in a
drive stun essentially what a drive stun
is so it's not that the officer stood
back and pressed the trigger and shot
the probes at Mr hman no the officer
took off the top of the um I'm sorry
with the new tase you you don't have to
take off the top of the cartridge um the
officer basically to to took the taser
and pressed it in um so it's not like
it's a it's not a 5-second ride um it's
essentially it's pain compliance for as
long as you're holding it on so um the
the the taser did make contact with Mr
hollman's arm two times um two times for
about one second each um you know and
the reason that police officers do that
you do that to distract the individual
so hopefully they go holy [ __ ] my arm
hurts they let go you put them in the
handcuffs and there's no more use of
force so that's that's the theory of why
a police officer would do that because
again again what are the other options
you could start to strike Mr hollan that
doesn't look good so again like police
officers don't have a whole lot of
options if someone isn't going to
cooperate um kanton says yeah um just
signed at the time to fight is in court
not on the side of the road I agree with
you 100% can't so um Mr Hollman he's
eventually arrested he's put in the back
of the car 21 minutes later um he has a
he has uh he has a heart attack and dies
according to Medical experts at John
Hopkins University who've looked over
the autopsy um they basically said that
because Mr hman suffered from
pre-existing severe heart conditions
they believe that the likely cause of
death was to the exertion from the
altercation cardiac dis rythmia um so
essentially I'm not a medical guy some
kind of a heart attack issue that you
know um what the family is is is the
family the hman family who obviously
they've hired Ben Crump so you know
where this is going um the hman family
not only wants officer Kim Kimbro to be
charged with murder but they also want
the tow truck driver um to be who
assisted in helping to hold down and
subdue Mr hman they want the tow truck
driver um to be um uh to be uh charged
as well here are some of my thoughts on
this I've read some of your thoughts as
I'm going through here are some of my
thoughts on this case definitely put in
the chat if you agree or even more
interestingly if you disagree uh my
first thought is sign the damn ticket
avoid all of this fight it in court yes
is it an outdated and stupid law that we
still have to sign tickets to
acknowledge that we got them even if um
it's on body camera is that stupid let's
all agree that it's stupid yes okay so
whose fault is it if we agree it's
stupid whose fault is it if you're going
to say it's the the police officer's
fault I'm going to disagree with you
there here's why here's why because
police officers don't write the law
that's whose fault it is secondly police
officers are not the politicians who run
and manage Police Department who write
the policies again police officers have
to follow their policies if you're going
to say that a police officer shouldn't
have to follow the policy of the police
department or can pick and choose well
that's interesting I just want you to
apply that to every situation with
police officers because as soon as a
police officer [ __ ] up the first thing
you're going to say is well they had
training and policy and they didn't
follow it so that's why officers have to
and should as much as possible follow
their training and policy so again if
you have a problem with it and I have a
problem with it I think it's an outdated
stupid law it's the lawmakers and it is
the it is the lawmakers and it is the
politicians who run the police
departments who need to make that change
um cuz officers I can tell you once they
write a ticket they don't give a [ __ ] if
they get a signature or not they just
they have to do it it's part of it's
part of what they're they are supposed
to do um if you hand in a traffic ticket
that doesn't have a signature on it it's
going to get kicked back and then you're
going to be in Internal Affairs for not
doing your job properly again so it's
not the fault of the individual police
officer um what I also want to say about
this there was a point um after they
went back and forth for 15 minutes where
officer Kimbro said to Mr Hollman okay
you're under arrest turnaround it was at
that point now again who knows if he's
telling the truth or not but it was at
that point that Mr hman says okay okay
okay I'll go ahead and sign give me a
pen I'll go ahead and sign officer
Kimbro didn't allow him to change his
mind um now my opinion on this now this
isn't policy this isn't law this is my
opinion so please if you disagree go
ahead and put put it in the chat my my
my policy or my opinion I don't have a
policy my opinion on this is that a
police officer in a situation like this
until the individual until force is
being used or until the individual is in
handcuffs if they want to change their
mind that that stupid decision that Mr
Hollman made to not sign the ticket
anytime before there's an actual use of
force or until the individuals in
handcuffs the officer should allow Mr
Hollman to change his mind again that's
not policy that's not law that's my
opinion okay um the officer said you
know hey turn around you're under arrest
and officer Mr hollan said hey no no
okay I'll go go ahead and sign in my
opinion officer Kimbro should have let
him sign now it doesn't have to it's not
policy it's not law now again now let's
say officer Kimbro goes oh okay cool go
ahead and sign and then they're going
back and forth and he still refuses okay
so you give him one chance right but but
to me I I would say that it because as a
police officer what I want police
officers are to be as reasonable as
possible right so be as reasonable as
possible and do everything you possibly
can to make it so the individual doesn't
have to go to jail for not signing a
ticket because that's so stupid right um
but again the police officer can't stand
out there an hour officer Kimbro spoke
with Mr Hollman and tried to tried to
convince him to sign the ticket for 15
minutes okay so it's not like this
happened within 30 seconds or two
minutes 15 minutes if you're going to
sit here and say well officer Kimbro he
actually should have waited 17 minutes
for for for 62-year-old Mr Hollman to
not be such an [ __ ] fine I I get it I
get it I would have lik like to have
seen officer Kimbro give him one last
chance um again it's not policy that's
not law just my opinion um um even
though Mr Hollman is an old man um 62
years old I you know um police officers
can still use less lethal Force to
affect a legal arrest when a suspect
actively resists um the use of force
that was applied does appear to be
within the law it does appear to be
reasonable um uh what another thing the
family is just salivating over is that
they're trying
they're trying to blame and Su axon
which is the maker of taser um however
the taser did not end Mr hollman's life
um it's far more likely that his
unnecessary stubbornness and unhealthy
heart are what killed Mr Hollman a taser
doesn't kill you okay um as a police
officer um when I was so when I was in
the police academy like most police
officers I was tased two different times
in the police academy it's not
comfortable it's not fun but you know it
lasts about 5 seconds each time and then
after there's 's no After Effects the
reason I'm saying this is because police
departments are not tasing Cadets or you
know PE officers in training officers
and then you know just to see if they
drop dead or not because the taser is so
dangerous it's not it's not it's less
lethal for a reason it's uncomfortable
I've been through it okay all police off
essentially all police officers say it's
uncomfortable but it's not deadly force
okay it's not deadly force which is why
um the act of actually being tased like
the 5-second Ride the Lightning that's
not deadly force um so yeah that that's
that's um the taser did not kill Mr
Hollman um however however the family is
is salivating at the idea of being able
to sue taser um to try to get more money
there which doesn't make doesn't make
any sense um okay so that's that case
the last case that I want to talk about
and um this one is another it's another
taser case so it seems like um uh boom
news says less lethal isn't non-lethal
sure no I I I agree less lethal is isn't
non-lethal meaning anything can happen
so sometimes people do die after their
Tas boom news um and typically what
happens is usually it's someone who has
heart problems they're fighting with
cops and a lot of times it's because
they're on meth or they're on they're on
PCP or something like that so yeah that
combination with a taser does sometimes
um end in death um again it's extremely
rare it's extremely rare but it could
happen um where I've seen tasers kill
people and it isn't even the taser but
when I've see tasers kill people is when
someone is running away as you're
running away from a police officer and
I've talked about this in other cases
the police officer tases you from behind
and the person just goes flying and they
end up um split splitting their head
open yeah but again like that's not
because of the of the 50,000 volts or
whatever it is you know that's because
they were you know incapacitated um I've
also seen police officers um I've also
seen uh uh police officers um I've only
seen one of these because we were told
not to do this someone standing on like
on like a six foot ledge with Like a
Knife um I've seen a k I think it was
was in New York City five or years ago
so police officer tased a guy who's up
on a Ledge with a knife well when you
tase someone who's on a Ledge they are
predictably going to fall and not be
able to catch themselves and individual
cracked his head open and died so yeah
again but again that's not you know had
the individual not Fallen they would
have been tazed and put in handcuffs and
not died so you know tasers typically
don't kill someone but yes there are
situations where someone does die after
a tasing there are situations where
sometimes people die after eating a
cheese pizza okay doesn't mean that
cheese pizza is is is illegal right um
or or a deadly force case so last case
I'm going to talk about um it's a Jawan
Dallas um and this happened in Mobile
Alabama I know we had someone in here
from Alabama um so this case um this is
the case where Reverend Robert Clapton
he's the president of the mobile uh am I
saying that right mobile mobile I don't
know if I'm saying that in that right
I've never been to the state state of
Alabama um but the president of Mobile
Alabama branch of the National
Association advaned the NAACP um he he
said that this case was in line with the
death of George Floyd uh sorry to
disappoint it's [ __ ] not and I'm
going to explain to you why um however
Mr Dallas was in the wrong place at the
wrong time and I'm going to explain how
so this happened on July 2nd 2023 in
Mobile Alabama so police officers
responded to a burglary in progress at a
residence Okay police officers um then
arrived on scene to that burglary the
person who called in was a neighbor and
they gave a description of an individual
of a young black male who was the
burglar um of that place um police
officers went to the scene as they got
you are saying it right thank you
Patricia I I I appreciate it I'm not
trying to to mispronounce anybody's City
I just haven't been there so I don't
have any any experience with it um so
police officers again they were uh they
were they went to the scene they were um
uh the suspect by the CER was a young
black male um in the area of the house
who who just who just burglarized that
house police officers got because it was
a burglary it was a pretty high cult
high priority call for service so it's
not like there was a 30 minute or an
hour time delay police officers got
there pretty quick within a couple
minutes so police officers get to the
scene when they get to the scene they
see um Mr uh Mr uh Jawan Dallas they see
Mr Dallas who is a young black male he
is sitting in a vehicle right in front
of the house that was burglarized like
right there like right there um so
police officers then went and detained
Mr Dallas or they tried to detain Mr
Dallas now I I should say let me just
get the cat out of the bag Mr D was not
the individual who burglarized the house
wrong place wrong time now this might be
surprising to some people police
officers are not psychic police officers
do not possess psychic ability okay this
is why there are different standards for
police officers being able to detain
police officers need Reasonable
Suspicion to detain and then probable
cause to arrest so here's how this
should have gone police officers did
have Reasonable Suspicion and reasonable
suspicion to detain that's actually a
really low standard all it is is a
reasonable belief that someone is
involved in Criminal activity well okay
you have a burglary someone called it in
they gave a description of a suspect and
now a few minutes later you have someone
matching that description right outside
in front of the house that's reasonable
suspicion to detain now again that's not
enough to arrest and take to jail that's
enough to detain so here's how this
should have gone police officers
absolutely 100% had Reasonable Suspicion
to detain Mr Dallas so what here's what
should have happened they should have
detained Mr Dallas maybe put him in
handcuffs and they should have called
the caller called the caller and said
hey um you called us in a few minutes
ago um we have someone in custody would
you mind coming over here and telling us
if this was the individual um and then
you know and then along with other
evidence surveillance video in the area
but again cops aren't psychic and all of
these things take a few minutes which is
why there's different standards and
levels of when police officers can
detain um so that's what should have
happened in this case now had that
happened let's say Mr Dallas cooperated
right he would have been placed in
handcuffs that's irritating I get it I
get it but again cops aren't psychic
they only have the information that they
have at the time right um so they would
have detained Mr Dallas maybe put him in
handcuffs had the person come over to
the scene the person would said nope
that isn't the guy that was said okay Mr
Dallas we're sorry here's here's your
here's your case number if you have a
complaint it's all on body camera
footage um here's the name of the
officers involved have a good day we're
sorry this happened this is why it
happened but you know if you don't like
it here's how you can go ahead and
complain and really the cops wouldn't
have done anything wrong you know they
had Reasonable Suspicion to detain and
as quickly as possible they were able to
rule Mr Dallas out of the suspect that's
what should have happed happened but
that's not what happened because as soon
as police officers went to detain Mr
Dallas which they absolutely had
Reasonable Suspicion to do Mr Dallas ran
from the scene now put yourself in the
mind of a police officer here you have
Reasonable Suspicion to detain someone
from a felony and that person runs from
you are you going to think that they are
more guilty or less guilty let's use
common sense here right so again
fighting with cops if you're trying to
prove to police officers that you're
innocent running and fighting with
police officers is literally the exact
opposite thing you would want to do
right um we're going to use just common
sense here so so they they go ahead and
detain they try to detain Mr Dallas he
runs from police officers there a short
foot chase cops ended up catching him
while they're trying to get him in the
handcuffs he tries to bite the police
officers okay he tries to bite the
police officers police officers then
escalate a little bit and they use a
Taser I think they tase Mr Dallas two
different times they put him in
handcuffs and they do get him to the
back of the police vehicle while he's in
the back of the police vehicle 21
minutes later he dies he dies in police
custody 21 minutes later there was an
autopsy autopsy found a couple different
things that uh Mr Dallas had a [ __ ] ton
of methamphetamine in his system and he
had a heart attack so he died of a heart
attack um uh that and methamphetamine in
his system um the cause of death does
not say anything about a taser the cause
of death does not say anything about a
taser the cause of death does not blame
the police officers and the medical
examiner report or anything like that um
um uh so um Steve lner says police are
not psychic but residents are expected
to be all knowing 24/7 no definitely not
no one no one says that or has said that
um so no Steve lader um again that's a
pretty dishonest comment but that's okay
um so Mr Dallas he ends up dying in
police custody while he's in handcuffs
in the back of the car he ends up dying
of a heart attack um so you know the uh
we the the chief of of police of of
Mobile Alabama police department his
name is a Paul PR and uh he had a pretty
good statement on this um again I know a
few minutes ago I said that I preferred
the sheriff model over the police chief
model um unless unless you are lucky
enough to have a police chief like Paul
pry because Paul pry he did a press
conference on this and the chief of
police he said you know what here's what
happened he said police officers had
Reasonable Suspicion to detain Mr Dallas
um while they were making contact with
Mr Dallas oh I I I I I left out a part
I'm sorry I left out a part of the use
of force during the use of Force while
uh the officers were trying to um detain
Mr Dallas while they were tasing him two
different times he actually tried to
grab the police officer's taser it was
not successful but he was trying to grab
at the police officer's taser I should
just put that put that in there um um a
chief Paul pryan says that um once he
said that once Mr Dallas tried to grab
and take possession of the police
officer taser that the police officers
had every right not only under Police
Department policy but under Alabama to
utilize deadly force he said that even
though police officers had the right to
utilize deadly force in that situation
the officers showed great restraint and
didn't and we're able to get Mr Dallas
in the handcuffs without having to
utilize deadly force even though he was
grabbing at that taser um so I should
just say that um uh a grand jury um did
hear this case it's all on body camera
footage body camera footage hasn't been
made public yet I'll talk about that in
a second um a grand jury did watch the
body camera footage um declin
to prosecute the the police officers um
the the the da um he also said that you
know um the the da said that um he also
declined to prosecute not only because
of the grand jury but you know
essentially he said that you know the
death of Mr Dallas was his own fault
essentially he was high on meth he
fought with police officers and he had
had a heart attack and the none of the
force utilized by police officers was
excessive um again um the issue of
concern is that Mr Dallas was not the
burglary suspect
um because police officers are not are
not are not psychic that the police
officers didn't have a time to
investigate that um however what is what
should know so so the idea the the the
Paradigm that innocent people don't run
from police officers again again that's
not 100% but this case we're going to
put that a little more um into the into
this bucket of into this bucket of of of
Truth there and again he wasn't the
subject of the burglary however when
police officers searched his car um
after he was under arrest when they were
going to you tow the car and search the
car they found a gun in the car and a
[ __ ] ton of crystal meth so again he
wasn't running because he was he
committed the burglary he was running
because he had a gun in the car and a
[ __ ] ton of crystal meth so again um you
know he had committed a felony not the
felony police officers had Reasonable
Suspicion for but probably a more
serious felony that's why he ran from
police officers he didn't just run from
police officers because he thought it
was a good idea or because he was a a
First Amendment or or a sovereign
citizen no he ran from police officers
because he had a gun in the car and uh
and and and crystal meth again had he
not let's do this had he not had a gun
and crystal meth in the car right he
probably would have cooperated with
police officers and in three minutes
they would have had to person down to
say hey this isn't the guy Mr Dallas
walks away and that's the outcome I want
I want less violence between police
officers and citizens meaning like in
the Las Cruz's case I want police
officers to be more reasonable okay I'm
blaming the the the Las Cruses police
officer for that case also in this case
I'm blaming Mr Dallas okay I am 100% uh
blaming Mr Dallas uh Steve Ladner says
does a video exist that proves he was
grabbing for a taser hey good question
Steve so um we are told that um that
there is body camera footage um of this
incident it has not been made public um
now because I work for a body camera
channel here and we have a body camera
channel here I want the body camera
footage I want transparency from police
offic so I hope that they release the
footage um again it's not the fault of
the police officers if they don't
release the body camera footage it's the
politicians who run the police
department they are the ones who
determine whether or not um the footage
comes out um so it's my hope that the
footage does come out just like with the
Paul Pelosi case you know in California
there are some states that have good
laws some states that don't have laws
for that um so I'm hoping that it
absolutely comes out um I'm going to
read a I'm going to read a quote from
the mobile mobile County DA uh Keith
Blackwood he said Mr Dallas suffered
from some serious underlying medical
issues those issues were exacerbated by
drug use when Mr Dallas initiated the
struggle with police that situation also
exacerbated the underlying medical
conditions I got one question how do we
get more District Attorneys like Keith
Blackwood that's my question all right
that's the last case that we are going
to uh that we're going to talk about
here uh yeah just uh just see if we have
any uh let see if we have any uh uh
comments here um about what was uh going
on or any other questions about this
case um uh let's see uh we had some
really good comments uh really really
appreciate they AB boom news says he
probably shouldn't grab for the taser
either either yeah yeah I mean obviously
if you try to if you try to grab a taser
from a police officer and you're going
to try to taser police officer that's a
deadly force situation um it just shows
that the police officers were trying to
um um show as and give Mr Dallas as much
restraint as possible because again his
situation they could have used deadly
force and they didn't I think that's
good I don't want Cops to use dead
deadly force unless they absolutely have
to I'm glad they were able to resolve
this situation without shooting Mr
Dallas it's not the fault of police
officers that Mr Dallas consumed a [ __ ]
ton of methamphetamine and had a heart
attack not the fault of the police
officers um so like I said here how I'm
going to end this is uh you know like I
said how can we get more District
Attorneys like Keith Blackwood I think
that's a reasonable question to ask
because very recently there was a
conference it was the first of its kind
conference in California was actually
hosted at UC Berkeley it was uh hosted
at UC Berkeley University it was a group
of prosecutors led by George gasone and
Keith Ellison from Minnesota um and
essentially this was a conference of how
Das can successfully prosecute police
officers so we do have a faction out
there of people who are supposedly in
law enforcement who are trying to better
prosecute police officers um so that
that is out there there are people who
are trying to put police officers in
jail for objectively reasonable officer
involved shootings they're trying to
stretch when police officers um are
trying to narrow when police officers
can use force and deadly and especially
deadly force to protect their own lives
that is out there um so that's one of
the reasons why we do this show is
really try to talk about things from all
sides if a cop makes a mistake we're
going to talk about it if a cop does the
right thing and they're being prosecuted
yeah I'm going to be pretty I'm going to
be pretty pissed off and irritated about
that too wherever the blame happens to
fall I think we should put it in there
here's why I I here's why I'm saying
this is that if there is something that
the police officer did wrong let's say
there's a bad law let's say there's a
bad policy and not today's show we
talked about both and we I said yes
here's a bad law here's a bad policy and
maybe there's bad training right so I I
think that if we say a police officer
did something wrong we should be able to
say okay they did something wrong they
should have done this and then point to
law policy or training and it's it's
important to say exactly where that fix
is but if you if if none of those things
are the fault of the police officer and
it's somewhere else blaming the police
officer or Prosecuting the police
doesn't make a whole lot of sense it
seemed dishonest that's the kind of
stuff that we are fighting about um all
right Kon Hall of Shame um thank you so
much for being in I appreciate your
comments I appreciate everybody's
comments thank you so much and listen if
you haven't already please go ahead and
subscribe to the to to the channel make
sure you share with your uh friends and
family if you want to go ahead and
follow me I do I do daily content over
at police law news and just putting it
out there again for amans at press uh uh
and uh Ben over at watching The Watchmen
like to extend an invitation um to do a
live podcast and kind of discuss some of
these important issues when it comes to
First Amendment Auditors in our opinion
here over at Copwatch TV you guys are
excellent First Amendment Auditors
because you have the goal of discussion
dialogue and education there are some
First Amendment Auditors who do not have
those goals and it's pretty obvious um
we think that you are the the standard
Bearer for this particular particular in
Industry we'd love to have a
conversation with you here on our
Channel we will reach out to you as well
about that I hope everyone has a great
weekend be
safe