MediaMatrix
Home
Channels
Videos
YouTube
Import New Channel
Update Existing Channel
Update All Channel Videos
Import Missing Videos
YouTube API Settings
API Docs
Quick Actions
Add Channel
Add Video
YouTube
Import New Channel
Update Channel Videos
Update All Channel Videos
Home
Edit Transcript - Legal Expert/Cop Breaks Down Recent Police Cases Across the Country
Home
Videos
Legal Expert/Cop Breaks Down Recent Police Cases Across the Country
Edit Transcript
Edit Transcript
Language
Format
Source
Auto-generated
Yes
Confidence
Content
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
Cancel
Save Changes