LBPD OFFICER SHOT IN LEG BY OWN GUN DURING STRUGGLE WITH SUSPECT
By Greater Long Beach
According to information
provided by the Long Beach Police Department, an officer who was physically struggling to take a resisting suspect into custody just before midnight Thursday was accidentally shot in the leg by his own gun when the suspect struck one of the officer’s handguns, causing it to fire.
The suspect, a 21-year-old parolee named Ajay Steward, who was not in possession of a weapon, was subsequently taken into custody without injury. The injured officer, who was not identified by the LBPD, was transported to a local hospital and was treated and released a short time later. No other officers were injured during the incident.
Here is the LPBD press release in its entirety:
On Thursday, December 8, 2011, at approximately 11:43 p.m., Long Beach police responded to the 100 block of West Pacific Coast Highway regarding a 9-1-1 report of an armed robbery.
Our preliminary investigation revealed that officers arrived on scene, contacted the victim, and observed a possible suspect fleeing the area. Officers located the suspect in the 1900 block of Pacific Avenue and attempted to stop him; however, he refused and resisted officers. During the struggle to take the suspect into custody, the suspect struck one of the officer’s handguns, causing the gun to fire. The accidental shooting resulted in that officer being shot in the leg by his own gun.
The suspect, who was not in possession of a weapon, was subsequently taken into custody without injury. The injured officer was transported to a local hospital and was treated and released a short time later. No other officers were injured during the incident.
The suspect, who was on parole, has been identified as 21-year-old Ajay Steward of Long Beach. He was booked for robbery, battery on a police officer, resisting arrest and on four outstanding warrants. He is being held without bail at the Long Beach City Jail. As a result of the robbery investigation, a second suspect was also taken into custody out at the scene. She has been identified as 26-year-old Tarnarka Taylor of Los Angeles. She was booked for robbery and for an outstanding warrant. She is being held on $51,663 bail and is also being held at the Long Beach City Jail.
The Long Beach Police Homicide Detail investigates all officer-involved shootings. Anyone who may any information regarding this incident is asked to contact Long Beach Police Homicide Detectives Hugo Cortes and Peter Lackovic at (562) 570-7244.
96 Comments
By any chance, is this officer related to Plaxico Burress?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4493887
They can blame the other person all they want, but if an officer can not prevent himself from being shot while carrying out his duty, how the heck is he going to prevent an innocent person walking by from accidently being shot?
Ruehle can question an officer’s competence all he likes, but until we hear more about how the weapon actually discharged, how the heck can anyone know for sure that the officer was in any way at fault?
Agreed, John! Mike Ruehle or anybody else—anybody—can question an officer’s competence all he—or she—likes … because those officers are employed and compensated by Mike Ruehle and everybody else. An employer is measured by the kind of operation he or she runs, including by the quality and competence of the employees he pays to help run that operation. And an employer who lets employees know that their employment depends upon high performance—not on mistakes that tarnish the operation’s reputation or cost it huge amounts of money in lawsuits—is a more effective employer. That’s why civilian oversight of the police force should be in place, why civilian knowledge of who is a good and effective employee and who is making mistakes and causing public relations and financial problems is so important. Of course, we don’t have that. The Civilian Oversight Commission that was overwhelmingly approved a couple decades back has been neutered and citizens beg uselessly for the names of officers involved in bad behvior. And that’s why, with so little recourse and so little control over the employees we pay, Mike “Ruehle can question an officer’s competence all he likes.” In fact, under the circumstances, it’s kind of a civic duty. But I agree with (most of) the rest of your sentence, too, John: “until we hear more about how the weapon actually discharged, how the heck can anyone know for sure that the officer was in any way at fault?” as you also say, John,” The only change I would make to your statement is that I would say, “Until we LEARN more about how the weapon actually discharged…” Not “until we HEAR.” Hearing is passive…we dont know if what we are hearing is the truth. But learning is active.” Personally, I don’t assume that the officer is at fault. But I think we employers have the right to know his or her name … and whether or not anything like this has ever happened to this officer before.
I agree with Mr.Wielenga.
Dave, I completely agree. Civilian oversight of the police function is requisite. The police derive their authority FROM the public and the public should, indeed must, take effective steps to monitor their police forces. I have never suggested otherwise.
My objection is not to civilian questioning and oversight, it is to the knee-jerk manner in which Ruehle tends to condemn or cast doubt upon this police officer, whose name he does not yet know and whose background he has not one single clue about.
Civilians have the right of police oversight, but they also have the *duty* of *responsible* oversight. Not to condemn without just cause, or to disparage without some facts to support one’s beliefs.
Ruehle’s brand of oversight is not responsible, it is, to my mind, contemptible.
I will willingly accept your preference of “learning” the information we have a right to know, vs. simply “hearing” it.
I agree with Mr. Greet.
What difference does it make whether the officer was or was not at fault? The fact that an incident occurred resulting in someone getting shot “accidentally” is scary in itself.
There is zero chance that I will “accidentally” shoot someone because I don’t carry a gun. Other people who DO carry guns should be prevented from doing so if they are unable to prevent the “accidental” shooting of someone, including themselves.
There’s already enough innocent unarmed people being shot and killed by police intentionally without cops now shooting people “accidentally.”
Police Officer Greet was on his horse waiting to cross the street, when a little girl on her new shiny bike stopped beside him.
‘Nice bike,’ Officer Greet said. ‘Did Santa bring it to you?’
‘Yes Sir,’ the little girl said, ‘he sure did!’
Officer Greet looked the bike over and handed the girl a $5 ticket for a safety violation and said, ‘Give this to your Dad, and next year, tell Santa to put a reflector light on the back of it!’
The young girl looked up at Officer Greet and said, ‘Nice horse you’ve got there sir. Did Santa bring it to you?’
Playing along with the girl, Officer Greet chuckled and answered, ‘Yes, he sure did!’
The little girl looked up at Officer Greet and said: ‘Next year tell Santa the dick goes underneath the horse, not on top’!!!
Ruehle you are an idiot. But just keep typing. The more you type, the more idiotic you sound.
You persist in passing judgment upon people when you have few facts and even fewer wits with which to assess the facts you do have.
Rather than leaping to your customary condemnations, why not try to learn more of the facts first?
There is nothing in this story, anywhere, that says the cop in question shot anyone, let alone himself. But just keep making an ass of yourself through your persistent and baseless assumptions.
Still sitting on the wrong side of the horse, ehh Greet.
Still typing, eh Ruehle?
Just keep riding that horse Greet.
Ruehle said: “What difference does it make whether the officer was or was not at fault?”
Yes, precisely my point. In Ruehle’s world, officers are worthy of condemnation and having their competence called into question whether or not there exists any proof that an officer is actually at fault. The fact that an accident occurred, and that an officer was involved, is all that Ruehle needs to launch into another tirade of ridicule and disparagement.
Perhaps the cop in this case *is* somehow at fault, but we have not yet learned that this is so. If we learn that it is so, the officer should be dealt with appropriately.
Perhaps the cop in this case is *not* somehow at fault, but we have not yet learned that either. If we do learn that this is so, we are not likely to hear Ruehle acknowledging this or retracting his knee-jerk condemnations because, in Ruehle’s world, if the cop is wrong, he is wrong and if the cop is right, he’s still wrong.
Such is the level of abject ignorance from which Ruehle often chooses to comment.
Greet, now that you have condemned me for saying this officer “is somehow at fault,” can you please point me and everyone else to where I actually said that?
Your one-sided defense of anything police related is again on hyper-drive. Your accusations again have no merit. Your attempts to distract the arguments by again trying to make it a personal issue is transparent to all who have observed your rants over and over again.
Just keep riding the wrong side of your horse. Feel free to continue to be mistaken for its backside.
Nice try, Ruehle. I never condemned you “for saying this officer ‘is somehow at fault’ ”
This is your typical intellectually dishonest tactic when you have no reasonable defense when someone calls you on the often asenine things you actually DO say.
In typical disingenuous fashion, you misrepresent what a person ACTUALLY says and then condemn THEM for YOUR own misrepresentation.
Please try, just this once, to defend against what I *actually* accused you of and condemned you for. Because you sometimes seem challenged in the area of reading comprehension, I’ll help you out:
“Ruehle can question an officer’s competence all he likes…” (You did)
“…the knee-jerk manner in which Ruehle tends to condemn or cast doubt upon this police officer, whose name he does not yet know and whose background he has not one single clue about.” (You do)
“…to condemn without just cause, or to disparage without some facts to support one’s beliefs.” (You do)
“Ruehle’s brand of oversight is not responsible…” (It is not)
“…it is, to my mind, contemptible.” (It is)
“Ruehle you are an idiot.” (You are)
“You persist in passing judgment upon people when you have few facts…” (You do)
“…just keep making an ass of yourself through your persistent and baseless assumptions.” (You did and do)
“In Ruehle’s world, officers are worthy of condemnation and having their competence called into question whether or not there exists any proof that an officer is actually at fault.” (Your own comments make this self-evident)
Now, feel free to attempt offer an effective defense against any of those things that I ACTUALLY said. There is no reason to conjure up misrepresentations. The things I accuse you of and condemn you for are listed quite plainly (again) for you to attempt to address.
Good luck!
Once again, PLEASE POINT TO WHERE I ACTUALLY SAID THE OFFICER “IS SOMEHOW AT FAULT.”
Once again, I didn’t say you said that. Good lord, Ruehle. Are you really that dense?
OK the link below will take you to an article that “pats” LBPD on the back for correcting a problem, wayyyyyy ahead of the curve:
http://www.ocweekly.com/2011-12-01/news/boy-scouts-explorers-police-department-sexual-abuse/
You’re welcome greet.
In case people haven’t noticed, I am QUOTING Greet’s comment where he condemns me for saying Officers were at fault. Why else would Greet be riding so high on the wrong side of the horse.
Ruehle, I never made a comment condemning you for saying officers were at fault. Thus you cannot possibly quote a comment I never made. Again, you really should try to work on your reading comprehension.
June 11, 1987: In a plea bargain that will keep him out of prison, suspended police Lt. Robert Padilla, 46, has pleaded no contest to one felony count of having sex with a 16-year-old Explorer Scout. Padilla was originally charged with four counts of unlawful sexual intercourse and oral copulation with a minor on two occasions in late February. He faced a
maximum sentence of three years in prison on each count.
The father of the female Explorer Scout filed a $250,000 negligence claim against the city, and the Police Department has tightened fraternization
guidelines and banned patrol ride-alongs of female Explorers unless a woman officer is present.
http://www.policeprostitutionandpolitics.com/pdfs_all/COPS_DAs_JUDGES_PED_PORN/1987%20Robert%20Padilla-%20Police%20Lt.-%20Long%20Beach,%20CA/%20No-Contest%20Plea%20by%20Officer%20-%20Los%20Angeles%20Times.pdf
And more recently, Long Beach Police Officer David Frazier, who was fired for having sex with a 17-year old Explorer Scout he met on the job.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:aIyRHyuOUvkJ:www.longbeachcomber.com/story.aspx%3FartID%3D1552+%22David+Frazier+%22+%22Explorer+Scout%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
In fact, Los Angeles considered disbanding their Explorer Scout program due to repeated problems experienced with their association with the Long Beach Police Department.
Not even the maturity and common decency to admit when you’ve clearly been proven wrong, ay Ruehle? Not uncommon for you at all, but very sad nonetheless.
Besides raping Explorer Scouts, Long Beach Police Officer DAVID FRAZIER was found to NOT have used unreasonable force in 2003 when he shot in the back and killed an unarmed man running AWAY from him.
William A. Reidder, the senior deputy city attorney who defended the Long Beach Police Department, said the verdict vindicated the officers and the department, which has been under fire from civil rights activists recently for TWO OTHER shooting deaths.
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/sep/07/local/me-verdict7
Cpl. DAVID FRAZIER, one of the Long Beach Police officers disciplined for his part in the illegal lobster dives, retired voluntarily in June amid Police Department-run criminal and administrative investigations into allegations he had an affair with a 17-year-old girl who volunteered with the LBPD’s Explorer Program.
Frazier was told on June 5 that the Internal Affairs investigation had been launched. He filed for his retirement the following day and was officially granted his request by the city’s Civil Service Commission on June 27.
Department officials were tight-lipped about his retirement, citing confidentiality requirements with personnel matters.
Several high-ranking members of the force stated the corporal was headed for termination if he hadn’t retired. His request for retirement eliminated that option and ended the administrative investigation, they said.
Owens said she could not discuss the details of Frazier’s case or that of any individual officer. In general, she said, there is nothing that can be done to prevent an employee from requesting retirement.
“We still have a criminal investigation in this matter,” she added.
http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/legal-services-lawyers/15361380-1.html
dave rules!
Padilla’s and Frazier’s actions brought disrepute upon themselves, their department, and their profession. They misused their positions for personal and, I believe, unlawful gain and in so doing they gave idiots like Ruehle more opportunities to spew their anti-LBPD and anti-police venom.
There is no excuse for what Padilla and Frazier did. It is wrong for any police officer to misuse his or her position for personal, unethical, or unlawful gain.
But it is also wrong to paint law enforcement in general or LBPD specifically with the same brush of condemnation that Ruehle takes such pleasure in using.
I think it is also wrong, and quite frankly despicable, for yet another of Ruehle’s many accusations to be proven false (as they so often are) and for him to refuse to acknowledge his falsehood or to make any attempt to correct the record.
Ruehle commits this same sort of rhetorical fraud we have just seen here, over and over and over, on this site and on others.
At some point I hope more participants on these sites finally start to see Ruehle for the bitter, spiteful, insulting fraud that he is. Maybe the other kids were mean to him on the playground. Maybe some cop called him a name during a traffic stop. Maybe he’s still bitter about his criminal arrest and conviction.
Who knows?
For whatever reason, however, Ruehle detracts far more from these discussions than he contributes and he undermines whatever important information he presents or any valid concerns that he has with his persistently false, fraudulent, and blatantly misleading methods.
Padilla and Frazier were wrong. Every cop that departs from the path of ethical and professional law enforcement is wrong. Every police department that fails to properly investigate misconduct or allows whistle-blowers to be retaliated against, is wrong.
And so is Ruehle.
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day –- What Is Enough? (Part 1)
“A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.” — Author Unknown
“Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Seek what they sought.” — Matsuo Basho
“Just as there is no loss of basic energy in the universe, so no thought or action is without its effects, present or ultimate, seen or unseen, felt or unfelt.” –- Norman Cousins
“No snowflake ever falls in the wrong place.” –- Zen Saying
“The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.” — Niels Bohr
“In this, the late afternoon of my life, I wonder: am I casting a longer shadow or is my shadow casting a shorter me?” — Robert Brault
“Some people walk in the rain, others just get wet.” — Roger Miller
(Source: quotegarden.com)
another classic dwight!
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day — What Is Enough? (Part 2)
“It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers.” — James Thurber
“You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.” — Author Unknown
“One day, someone showed me a glass of water that was half full. And he said, “Is it half full or half empty?” So I drank the water. No more problem.” — Alexander Jodorowsky
“Before enlightenment — chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment — chop wood, carry water.” — Zen Buddhist Proverb
“You never know what is enough, until you know what is more than enough.” — William Blake
“The obscure we see eventually. The completely obvious, it seems, takes longer.” — Edward R. Murrow
“If a man who cannot count finds a four-leaf clover, is he lucky?” — Stanislaw J. Lec
(Source: quotegarden.com)
SO, was Long Beach Police Officer David Frasier charged and prosecuted with statutory rape upon a minor explorer scout, or did the Long Beach police AGAIN overlook the criminal activities of one of their own? There appears to be no record of an arrest in this case or charges brought.
Once again, Ruehle manages to ask a good question, but in his typical petulant and venomous manner.
Yet again, Ruehle’s premise is flawed. He knows very well that LBPD has unfortunately found it necessary to investigate and seek and achieve prosecutions on several of its former officers throughout the years. Ruehle knows this because he has listed some of those very cases during some of his previous anti-LBPD tirades both here and elsewhere.
Ruehle will not acknowledge this truth, however, any more than he will almost never acknowledge his many falsehoods.
However, Long Beach Police and the District Attorney did NOT charge or prosecute David Frasier for statutory rape of an underage explorer scout. And WHY IS THAT?
Long Beach police officer David Frazier did the following:
1. Shot in the back and killed an unarmed man.
2. Participated in illegal lobster fishing while on-the-job.
3. Committed statutory rape of an explorer scout.
Yet, because David Frazier was a Long Beach police officer, he is protected from prosecution of outrageous illegal activities that would send any other person to jail for years.
If Ruehle knows for certain that Frasier was not charged and prosecuted, he should cite his source, when he contacted them, and what reason they gave for declining to charge and prosecute him.
If he is unwilling to do so, then he is unwilling to base his judgment on this issue on facts rather than assumptions.
Note that Ruehle still hasn’t been able to bring himself to admit his recent falsehood here or attempt to correct the record. Just as I suggested would be the case, he has moved on and completely ignores his falsehood now, just as he usually does when someone calls him on them.
conversely greet if you know that he WAS charged and prosecuted you should cite your source or we will just assume youre pretending your ex officer status gives you access into another officer’s personnel file.
Come on, Ruehle. If what you said is accurate, it should be a simple thing to prove that this is so. It may very well be accurate. I really have no idea. I am anxious to learn that you have confirmed that Frasier was never charged and prosecuted, who confirmed that informartion for you and, what reasons your source offered for any decision to not prosecute.
You presume that if Frasier was not charged and prosecuted, that it was because he “was a Long Beach police officer”, and that he was “protected from prosecution of outrageous illegal activities that would send any other person to jail for years.”
Yet you have commented in the past on other former officers who LBPD has charged and prosecuted for what I consider to be outrageous illegal activities. So your premise concerning Frazier seems flawed. Can you offer a reasonable explanation for the apparent contradiction?
I am also still hoping you’ll acknowledge your previous falsehood in this comment string and make an effort to correct the record.
the funny thing is every post you write trying to discredit mike just makes you all the more unbelievable, as far as i was concerned your credibility was shot from the day you were forced to admit you were LBPD for others it may have been the discovery of your online resume which revealed your employment with DHS spying on your fellow americans. whatever the reason i feel we are all in agreement as to your veracity.
Well, Ruehle? Any citation for the source of your assertion concerning Frazier?
If you have spoken to someone who would have knowledge of this, and if Frasier was not charged or prosecuted, did your citable source offer an explanation as to why?
Do you have a response to the fact that LBPD has unfortunately found it necessary to investigate and seek and achieve prosecutions on several of its former officers throughout the years?
Are you yet interested in admitting your previous falsehood in this comment string and correcting the record on that score?
According to Greet:
“There is no excuse for what Padilla and Frazier did. It is wrong for any police officer to misuse his or her position for personal, unethical, or unlawful gain”
Though Greet acknowledges Long Beach police officers Padilla and Frazier did wrong in raping young explorer scout girls, Greet still can’t help but defend their misconduct because he is a recently retired Long Beach cop.
Another Long Beach cop would have to rape one of Greet’s kids in order to lose his support. Maybe even that wouldn’t be enough.
Ride that horse high Greet.
Again we see Ruehle’s abject falsehoods and his true lack character in action.
Not once, anywhere, have I ever defended either Padilla’s or Frazier’s conduct or actions in this regard.
Not once. Anywhere.
Rather than simply site his source for an apparent assumption he has stated as fact (that Long Beach Police and the District Attorney did NOT charge or prosecute David Frasier for statutory rape of an underage explorer scout)
and
Rather than admint to another falsehood he posted in this thread and correct the record (that I never condemned him for saying this officer is somehow at fault in the accidental shooting)
…instead Ruehle launches yet *another* blatant falsehood and then makes utterly despicable comments about the rape of my own children.
Again Ruehle has clearly proven himself to be as pathetic as he is false, as despicable as he is fraudulent, and as utterly detestable as he is duplicitous.
“Again Ruehle has clearly proven himself to be as pathetic as he is false, as despicable as he is fraudulent, and as utterly detestable as he is duplicitous.”
maybe now you’ll stop stalking him. i mean if he is everything you say surely you dont need to pursue him across local media comment sections do you?
Just like Ruehle and his various comment board sycophants, I’ll comment on any board I choose in any way I choose unless and until the editors indicate otherwise. If those others are free to spew their rancid rhetorical bile here and elsewhere, I am likewise free to call them on it.
Apparently that circumstance seems inconvenient and uncomfortable for people like howardx.
In a word: “Good.”
“i mean if he is everything you say surely you dont need to pursue him across local media comment sections do you?”
A definite mancrush. Wonder if the greet partnered up much with another of LBPD’s finest, Officer John Stolpe?
“A definite mancrush.”
sometimes these things bloom later in life. i just hope greet knows we are all here for him when he gets these “issues” he has sorted out…
Lol….and the Ruehle sycophants chime in right on cue!
i prefer toady to sycophant…
Not really glad you find it funny greet. Yes bad apples are everywhere, but I find it very disturbing that the LBPD has had so many. It’s not like these are construction workers; these are people with enormous amounts of power that should not be pulling these stunts, especially raping teenage girls.
In the last few years the list of crooked cops is incredible. I hate to even think about it.
greet I am a LB native, here for 60 years. Many fine LBPD officers (most retired now) I have known all my life, and am happy they are/were Police Officers here. Quality dedicated people.
I think the LBPD started going to shit when they hired you greet. I asked a friend about you, a retired copper whose family has been well-represented in the LBPD for decades, and all he could do was laugh. Enough said?
A good read on the greet’s buddy LBPD Officer John Stolpe:
http://rangergord.blogspot.com/2007/09/park-ranger-vs-cop-john-stolpe-trial.html
What I find humorous, wrongbeach, is the consistently offensive and illogical manner with which you and your fellow Ruehle-sycophants choose to deal with people ho happen to disagree with you. In any case, I am not particularly concerned with whether you are feeling glad or not, and why.
I fully agree with you where Padilla and Frasier are concerned. Perhaps you missed the part where I said “There is no excuse for what Padilla and Frazier did. It is wrong for any police officer to misuse his or her position for personal, unethical, or unlawful gain.”
In my view, one crooked cop is one too many and I despise every report of unethical or unlawful police officer misconduct of which I read. Such people do every good and professional cop a grave disservice and they exhibit an attitude toward a noble profession that can only be described as despicable.
But as unacceptable as the list of crooked cops is, it is not nearly so lengthy as you seem to believe, particularly in comparison to the list of good and professional cops.
I was born here in Long Beach. With the exception of a brief stint in the military, I have lived my entire adult life here. When I decided to attempt a career in law enforcement, Long Beach was the only place I applied because it is the only place I cared enough about to assume the many risks that police officers are often asked to face.
There are and were most certainly far better police officers than I proved to be during my career, but I honestly served to the best of my ability, with honor and with professionalism. I never received a poor performance review from any of my supervisors and previous executives (some of which you may have known) saw fit to promote me twice. So yes, I suppose I may have been a better cop, but I think I might also have been much worse. I will leave that for others to assess.
If your friend chooses to laugh when he considers my service to our city, then that is of course, his right to do so, having earned a service retirement in his own right. People such as he have earned the right to judge the character of my service. You, Ruehle-sycophant that you have proven yourself to be, have not.
wrongbeach is a henchman not a sycophant
“I never received a poor performance review from any of my supervisors and previous executives”
prove it.
People like howardx have the temerity to demand proof from others, when they persistently offer so many unproven assertions themselves. Sad.
According to Greet, “I never received a poor performance review from any of my supervisors and previous executives”
Interesting. That’s not what I’ve been told by other Long Beach cops who told me Greet’s peers and supervisors found him and his second guessing to be a constant pain in the horse. Hence, he was run off.
its pretty easy to make claims when you know no one can access your personnel records. anecdotal evidence from the community seems to indicate you may not be telling the truth about your performance. very easy to put all these claims to rest…
“If your friend chooses to laugh when he considers my service to our city”
Rather paranoid about your career performance huh greet? Who said he was considering your “service” to the city? I got the impression that he thinks (confirms) your a nutjob!
“But as unacceptable as the list of crooked cops is, it is not nearly so lengthy as you seem to believe…”
It goddamn well is you liar!
wrongbeach: In the absence of information to the contrary, I took your comment concerning your friend’s laughter in the context of the totality of your other comments, which were to question the character of my service to my community.
A lot of people think I am a bit of a nut job. Most people who work in law enforcement HAVE to be a bit of a nut job to be willing to do that work day in and day out for decades in a city the size and complexity of Long Beach. Every cop I have had the privilege to know (perhaps even your pal) is a little bit nutty in one way or another just to be able to deal with the things they see and the things they are expected to do and not go completely insane.
Sometimes it is necessary to be a bit of a nut job to be able to deal in a positive manner with the likes of you, Ruehle, and the rest of his website sycophants.
You can post all of the epithets and make all of the unfounded allegations against me that you like, but doing so will not make your comments any more factual or reasonable.
Ruehle can desparage and lodge his unfounded allegations about who he claims to have spoken with and what they claimed to have said all he likes. My service record is both clean and clear, just like my conscience. I wonder whether Ruehle can honestly say the same?
One thing I know he cannot say…is that he has served his community for even a single day as a professional police officer. He has apparently never even attempted to do so, even part time, even as a volunteer. Not for one single day.
It is exceedingly strange to me that those who seem to be the greatest critics of law enforcement in general and LBPD in particular are also the ones who have not one single day of experience in actually serving their communities in that way.
Everyone is entitled to is or her opinion. Every citizen has a right -and a responsibility- to monitor and to question his or her government closely. This includes the executive branch, which includes law enforcement.
But good faith questioning in an honest desire to learn and accept the truth of a matter is one thing.
Knee jerk condemnations of virtually everything our police officers do, before as many of the facts are known as reasonably can be known, is not responsible
It is reprehensible.
Former Long Beach Police Chief Tony Batts service record is also “clean and clear.” Yet, he was a well known wife beater and lied on the witness stand during the Lobstergate. “Clean and clear” is not a meaningful statement. Furthermmore, “clean and clear” means nothing because it can not be verified by the public.
http://www.longbeachcomber.com/story.aspx?artID=1563
I put more credence in the opinion of your peers, who apparently didn’t think a whole lot of the service you brag about.
By the way Greet, you never wrote about why your blowhard column got booted off the LBPost. Apparently, they also tired of your one-sided second guessing BS.
I wasn’t bragging, Ruehle. I was honored and privileged to serve our community as a police officer. Bragging is what YOU usually do every single time you discuss your tenure as BSRA Pres. Either way, I’m not concerned in the least about what you, a proven fraud with a self-admitted documented history of criminal conduct, thinks of me.
By the way, Ruehle. Shaun, may God rest his soul, and Ryan know very well the circumstances behind the reason a resigned my position from LBPOST.com. Feel free to ask Ryan anytime you like. Or, as I suspect will likely prove to be the case, you can continue to make your ignorant guesses. I don’t much care one way or the other.
Mike it was brought to my attention that the greet had a special place in his heart for batts, unlike many many good LBPD cops who despised batts for what he was.
Notice how the greet doesn’t address the MANY bad coppers in his old department?
The greet couldn’t even make it on the cut and paste fishwrapper.
Of course I have said here and elsewhere that I do not believe Dr. Batts was the best chief we ever had, but neither was he the worst. I have seen no proof that Dr. Batts lied on any witness stand, during the “Lobstergate” trial or any other. If Ruehle and his sycophants want to rely upon the Beachcomber article for that proof -written as it was by a person who, like Ruehle, has an LBPD arrest and conviction record and a very big axe to grind against LBPD- then I think they should raise their standards for proof more than just a little.
Of course I have also said here and elsewhere that there is no excuse for police officer misconduct. I have said that officers who have been accused of a crime should be immediately suspended pending the investigation and that they should be suspended without pay if they are held to answer at the preliminary hearing. I have said that if they are convicted of *any* misdemeanor or felony crime (you know, as Ruehle has been) they should be immediately fired. I have said that there is no prison cell deep or dark enough for a former cop who is convicted of any felony crime.
None of what I have *actually* said on these matters has any significance to Ruehle or his sycophants. They are only interested in their fraud, falsehood, and otherise misleading commentary. They are only interested in denegrating anyone who happens to have a point of view that differs from their own.
“dr.” batts ho ho ho…dr. frankenstein.
or greet should I substitute another hero of yours dr. mcdonald?
the greet
“wongbeach, as I have advised your buddy howardx elsewhere, I would be only to happy to engage with you in a mature and courteous discussion of the issues…”
wrongbeach
October 18, 2011
Good afternoon Mr. Greet,
With all due respect, speaking of Dr. Batts, didn’t an LBPD lieutenant write a letter to beeler’s “Beachcomber” rag acknowledging Dr.Batts history of domestic violence?
http://www.longbeachcomber.com/story.aspx?artID=2393&arc=1
Is retired LBPD Lt. Joe Rabe, in your esteemed opinion Mr. Greet, prevaricating?
John B. Greet
December 14, 2011
But good faith questioning in an honest desire to learn and accept the truth of a matter is one thing.
wrongbeach, as a dedicated Ruehle-socophant you have commented pretty much true to form here.
Dr. Batts is his proper title, having earned a doctoral degree some years ago. I have immense respect for such an academic accomplishment, whomever achieves it. You may not and that is entirely your prerogative.
What I actually said was: “I have seen no proof that Dr. Batts lied on any witness stand, during the “Lobstergate” trial or any other.”
I have no personal knowledge about whatever domestic issues Dr. Batts and his former wife had. If Lt. Rabe believes he does, it is not my place to dispute him. If Dr. Batts committed any sort of battery, spousal or otherwise, against the person of his forme wife, then I think he should have been prosecuted. If he was not prosecuted, perhaps there some very good reasons that did not involve any conspiracies or cover-ups.
Rep. Richardson is a very politically powerful individual and was even when she was a Long Beach City Councilwoman. If she wanted to press charges against Dr. Datts for any crime, at any time, I think she certainly had the ability to do so. So why didn’t she?
Unlike you and others who seem content with anecdotal accounts or comments from un-named “insiders”, I am interested in information that is factual and can be proven as such.
Do you have any?
Greet, you are a lying sack. I’ve NEVER been convicted of a felony as you claim: “felony crime (you know, as Ruehle has been)”
5-years ago, I was convicted of a misdemeanor DUI. No excuses. I made a mistake I will not repeat. Back then, you made sure, in your capacity as a Long Beach Police Officer, to tell the press about it when I was president of the Belmont Shore Residents Association, in an attempt to smear me because I was questioning police misconduct in my community. I understand your agenda to marginalize my representation of the community and in my opinion, you are a piece of shit for doing so.
Please tell everyone about this felony conviction you claim I have you lying sack.
Ruehle, much like your various sycophants, you are long on insult but short on comprehension. I never said you had been convicted of a felony crime. It simply suits your need to offer insults to misquote me as having said so.
Try quoting me fully and accurately -for once- and then try denying that what I *actually* said is true.
I never disclosed your arrest or conviction to anyone, I have simply chosen to repeat what I leanred from others about you. You do this all the time in my case, yet when you do it is apparently to be seen as acceptable. Interesting.
I do not believe I was even aware of your miserable, lying existence at the time of your arrest. I learned of your arrest like most everyone else, in the press. How they learned of it I honestly have no idea. If you believe you can prove otherwise, feel free to attempt to do so. Otherwise your persistence in accusing me of something you cannot prove is no different from all of the other falsehoods and fraud you so love to perpetrate here and elsewhere.
I have never attempted to smear you because you question misconduct in *our* community, I sometimes choose to challenge you when you far exceed simple questioning and move so anxiously into the realm of condemning officers and/or their actions when you have little or no facts upon which to base your condemnations. I sometimes choose to challenge you when you make accusations of crimes and/or misconduct and offer no proof to support them. I sometimes challenge you when you post obvious falsehoods, or once your falsehoods are proven, when you refuse to acknowledge your falsehoods and attempt to correct the record.
Those are the things I sometimes choose to do in your case, Ruehle. You and your sycophants seem to dislike that. I think that says far more about you and they than it does about me.
I find it interesting that you can employ such epithets as you have here, and then presume to try to take me to task for using “hurtful words” elsewhere. This is what is know in the real world as hypocrisy, Ruehle, and you have elevated that to a very fine art indeed!
YOU are a liar Greet. YOU commented on numerous blogs about details of my DUI arrest (speed, blood alchol level, location, day, time, etc.) never before made public until YOU provided that information. Information certainly not readily available to the public.
Greet is a lying sack.
And by the way, I did not “misquote” you as you claim. I quoted EXACTLY what you wrote, you lying sack.
Ruehle, normally I would say you are mistaken. But I have already told you that you are mistaken about these accusations in the past and have challenged you to prove them yet you persist in making them without offering any proof.
Thus the only reasonable conclusion must be that you are attempting to deliberately deceive others in repeating these baseless accusations.
If they are not baseless, then prove them. If you cannot prove them, you should not be asserting them as truth when you cannot prove them to be true. When you do that, you risk proving yourself to be the liar that I belive you to be.
The only thing I know about your arrest and subsequent conviction is what I have read in the press. Believe it or not, Ruehle, as far as I know, people in the police department don’t sit around discussing your miserable life or plotting against you. In the grand scheme of things, you just aren’t all that significant.
And by the way, you really should consider looking up the conjunction “or” and learning more about its meaning and common usage in the English language.
And then you really should consider ceasing to type for a while. The more you type, the more ignorant and deceitful you prove yourself to be.
Yikes:
http://www.infowars.com/indefinite-detention-bill-heads-to-obamas-desk
Ok now, sit…sit…sit…good boy!
Good point, rino2! Yet another reason to ask Pres. Obama supporters how they feel all that “hope and change” is working our for them.
Hey, at least he closed Gitmo as he promised us he would do, right?
Oh wait….
Ya, this bill would “codify in law the indefinite detention without trial of American citizens….”. Hopefully one’s opposition to a policy wouldn’t be classified as “working with a terrorist group”. Well, even if it wasn’t, who would know anyways.
Greet, I don’t need to prove anything to anyone. You know what you did you lying sack, and I know what you did. Ride that horse high.
Ruehle, the things you *claim* to know -but conveniently never make any effort to prove- could fill a thousand libraries. Your voluminous unproven accusations and unfounded allegations mean nothing to anyone but you.
May you live forever, Ruehle, content in your many misguided and unproven certitudes.
“Good point, rino2! Yet another reason to ask Pres. Obama supporters how they feel all that “hope and change” is working our for them.
Hey, at least he closed Gitmo as he promised us he would do, right?
Oh wait….”
Your ideological war hero, G.W.Bush, started the NEEDLESS Iraq War, President Obama ENDED the needless Iraq War!
Say for instance war starts in Iran or Syria and you have a problem with it and take action against it. Or say you disagree with “our” established free trade economic policies or Goldman Sachs. Will you be classified by an unknown entity as an enemy against America? Will you get a knock on your door at 3am? Who will be the judge and no jury.
@ LBer: Sorry, neither you nor Pres. Obama get to have it both ways.
When Pres. Obama has the unmitigated gall to take credit for bringing democracy and freedom to Iraq, neither he nor his many “hope and change”-blinded followers get to then also condemn Pres. Bush for actually getting that democracy and freedom ball rolling there.
Once again, Pres. Bush sought *and received* approval from Congress before going to Iraq.
Pres. Obama neither sought *nor received* approval from Congress before going to Libya.
But at least Pres. Obama closed Gitmo as he promised us all he would, right?
Oh wait…
The War was about oil and ego and nothing to do with freedom and democracy.
WsMD was simply Bush’s Gulf Of Tonkin. A flimsy excuse for starting a NEEDLESS war (exponentially ratcheting up the national debt) and which the sitting President has now accordingly ended(along with taking out Osama).
LBer: If the war had nothing to do with freedom or democracy for Iraq, then perhaps you should let Pres. Obama know that, because he is crediting that war with accomplishing just those very things. I’m sure the Pres. will be happy to accept your correction on the matter.
As for UBL, that also would most likely never have happened had not Bush 43 got him on the run in the first place and kept him on the run during the rest of Bush’s time in office. I give full credit to Pres. Obama for his part in finally bringing UBL to the justice he so richly deserved. Can you not also demonstrate the intellectual honesty required to give Bush 43 the credit he deserves for that as well?
Based upon your previous comments, I’m guessing probably not, huh?
Full Disclosure, Mr. Greet:
I won’t debate the war because I brought up the Iraq War for the sole purpose of serving as iced water for pouring on another overheating Ruehle/Greet shooting match.
It appears to have worked.
LBer, unlike Ruehle and his sycophants, I am quite capable of managing intelligent and courteous discussions and debates on multiple topics simultaneously. Feel free to debate away.
I remain more than prepared and able to deal with Ruehle or any of his sycophants whenever they next choose to crawl out from their respective rhetorical dung-heaps.
John B. Greet
December 16, 2011
“LBer….. I am quite capable of managing intelligent….discussions and debates….”
greet you have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that you’re not intelligent at all.
LBer
December 15, 2011
Full Disclosure, Mr. Greet:
“I won’t debate the war because I brought up the Iraq War for the sole purpose of serving as iced water for pouring on another overheating Ruehle/Greet shooting match.”
Problem is the greet is unable to bring any bullets.
Yes, I know, Mr. Greet. When such discussions degenerate to little more than name-calling mudslinging from all sides, it’s time to pour some cold water until the next local police or city hall scandal fires up these message boards again.
And that’s pretty much weekly if not more often.
Well, LBer, I willingly admit to descending at times into name calling where Ruehle and his sycophants are concerned. I made sincere attempts for years to avoid this but after routinely offering respect but never receiving any in return, it seemed clear that the only thing they understand best is childish name-calling and rudeness. I decided that since they seemed unable or unwilling to elevate their own dialog, I would have to begin speaking in the sort of language they seem most comfortable with. In this way, I thought, they might start actually hearing what I was trying to say, rather than simply ignoring it and offering insults.
It is clear that this new tactic isn’t having the desired effect with them. I hoped, however. I hoped.
Now Greet justifies falsely claiming I am a convicted felon because he was “speaking in the sort of language they seem most comfortable with.”
What a lying sack of shit.
“And that’s pretty much weekly if not more often.”
It does seem that way, Mr. Ruehle.
Ruehle, if you are seeking liars, you need only seek far enough to look in a mirror. I never once said you are a convicted felon. Not once, ever. If you believe this is false, then offer some proof that it is false. You will not be able to do so, of course.
It is past time, now, for you to simply acknlowedge that what you have accused me of here is false and that you simply misunderstood what I said.
There is no shame in admitting such an error, Ruehle. There is considerable shame, in my view, in continuing to falsely accuse someone of something as you are doing in this case.
Step up, Ruehle, acknowledge your misunderstanding. Just this once.
Oh well, so much for the cold water.
You gentlemen just keep firing away until the last man standing.
I’m moving on to more productive pursuits.
Thanks, LBer, your effort was admirable. I trust you can see the challenge I face, however. Either I let the falsehoods and fraud from Ruehle and his sycophants go unanswered, as I used to, or I try to force them to confront their own nonsense and highlight it so that others might see their method of commentary for the abject charade that it so often is.
Still waiting, Ruehle. Please offer proof that I falsely claimed that you are a convicted felon. Come on, your accusation should not be difficult to prove if it is true. So step up and prove it.
This will not happen though, because you cannot prove it, because it is not true.
What I *suspect* will happen is you will continue to ignore my challenges that you prove your allegation while at the same time you will repeat it over and over hoping that doing so will somehow magically transform it from a falsehood to a truth. When you have finaly tired of repeating your falsehood you will simply ignore the issue altogether and move on to publish other falsehoods and perpetrate other frauds.
This has been your typically deceitful pattern, here and elsewhere, over and over again, pretty much since I first becaome aware of your miserable existence, over a year ago now.
What a sad, tragic, and utterly pathetic individual you are, Ruehle.