REMEMBERING DOUG ZERBY: NO WORDS TO WARN HIM, BUT PLENTY TO BLAME HIM
By Dave Wielenga
Today (Dec. 12, 2011) makes one year since the unseasonably warm December evening that Doug Zerby was killed by Long Beach Police Department (LBPD) officers who opened fire on him from close range and without warning as he drunkenly played with an unattached water nozzle on the stairway of a friend’s Belmont Shore apartment.
A candlelight vigil and rally will be held this cold-and-rainy evening outside the Police Department’s downtown Long Beach headquarters to commemorate Zerby’s life and to protest the tactics of LBPD officers Jeffrey Shurtleff and Victor Ortiz, who claimed they shot Zerby in the mistaken belief that the water nozzle in his hands was actually a gun.
Over the next 11 months, three investigations by law-enforcement departments absolved Shurtleff and Ortiz of culpability on more-or-less the same basis.
In February, the Los Angeles County Coroner’s office determined that Zerby’s wound trajectory was consistent with someone in a seated position, feet flat on the floor with knees bent and leaning forward with both hands close together and raised out in front of him. This supported the officer’s statements that Zerby pointed the object at them when they fired.
In June, Long Beach Police Chief Jim McDonnell, who from the beginning had contended that Zerby was killed as a result of his own actions, made a preliminary finding that the actions of both officers were within Police Department policy and consistent with training guidelines.
The last and most-significant of those inquiries was by Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, whose report released on November 3 stated:
The evidence examined in this investigation leads to the conclusion that this was a tragic mistake of fact. The evidence also demonstrates that the police actually and reasonably believed that Zerby was armed with a firearm at the time of this incident…. For these reasons we conclude that Officers Shurtleff and Ortiz acted lawfully and in self-defense and the defense of others.
Those who disagree with this conclusion—among them Zerby’s family, which has filed suit and called for a federal probe—contend it is based on a very superficial reading of the circumstances that led to the killing and that it frighteningly expands the circumstances under which police can use deadly force.
“It’s one thing for the D.A. not to press charges,” attorney Brian Claypool, who has been retained by the Zerby family, said when Cooley’s report was released. “It’s another thing to issue a report that is irresponsible and full of omissions.”
Last December 12 Zerby spent much of the warm afternoon drinking in Belmont Shore bars near his Ocean Blvd. apartment. The sun was still out when he wobbled home on foot, quite drunk. He took a seat on the stairs of the triplex to wait for a friend and amused himself by playing with a trigger-style water nozzle.
At about 4:30 p.m., a relatively new resident of the apartment complex, Glenn Moore, heard his dog growl and looked out the window. He saw Zerby on the stairs, but did not recognize him as one of the residents of a rear apartment. He also did not recognize the water nozzle in Zerby’s hands. He thought it was a gun, and called 9-1-1.
While Zerby continued to drunkenly play with the water nozzle, Long Beach Police began to arrive. First came Ortiz, wearing body armor and carrying a shotgun. He took a position inMoore’s apartment where he could observe Zerby—by a sliding-glass door that was obscured by a wall. Then came Shurtleff, toting a Glock Model 22 .40 caliber handgun, who took a position in the kitchen window where he could also see Zerby.
While they watched Zerby, they radioed for backup, and it came in droves—squad car after squad car, sirens screaming, lights flashing—until Ocean Blvd. looked like a cross between black-and-white parking lot and a disco While most of the officers milled around, one strung yellow police tape from tree to tree to hold back the crowd that had been attracted by all the excitement. Another laid on his stomach across the sidewalk in front of the apartment complex, staring through the high-powered scope of a rifle that was trained on Zerby.
Apparently, none among this swarm of Long Beach Police officers could tell the difference between a water nozzle and a handgun. Certainly, none of them ever told Doug Zerby they were there. He continued to play with the nozzle, waving and pointing it.
After a little less than 8 minutes, Zerby eventually happened to point the nozzle in the direction of Officer Ortiz, who from his hidden position already had his shotgun pointed toward Zerby. From his hidden position in the kitchen window, Shurtleff reacted by firing his Glock at Zerby, over and over. Ortiz reacted to the sound of Shurtleff’s gun by squeezing off a couple of shotgun blasts toward Zerby.
As the handgun bullets and shotgun pellets ripped through Zerby’s skin, tissues and internal organs—mostly in his torso—Zerby reacted by bleeding profusely for awhile, barely even stopping when paramedics arrived. Then he died.
Out on the sidewalk, the officer lying on his stomach behind an automatic rifle, just kept staring through his high-powered scope. Whatever his reactions were, they did not include pulling the trigger.
Claypool, the attorney, insists that the investigations strong focus on Zerby’s almost incoherent behavior missed the point that officers Ortiz and Shurtleff did not follow proper procedure.
“They were on the scene for almost eight minutes, and neither officer took two seconds to identify themselves,” Claypool said. “That is all they had to do and Douglas Zerby goes home alive to his son.”
Oh, yeah—Zerby had a young son, eight years old when his daddy died, nine now.
It is acknowledged that Ortiz nor Shurtleff did not communicate with Zerby, neither identifying themselves nor giving him a command or in any way announcing their presence.
“Doug had no idea he was being observed,” said Eden Marie Biele, Zerby’s older sister. “He was alleged to be pointing in the direction of a hidden officer—out of sight behind a wall inside a home wearing bullet proof armor. There was no threat posed at any time. There was no justification to the shooting.”
















81 Comments
A very moving and colorful account of this very tragic incident, Dave. You, sir, are an excellent and extremely persuasive writer!
Sounds like its about time I AGAIN list all of the many, many, many Long Beach residents killed, raped, robbed and mowed down by Long Beach Police without being prosecuted. This doen’t even include the Long Beach Police Officers found to have lied in court to send innocent people to jail, only to be granted immunity from prosecution because they were cops.
There is a very fine gray line between the cops and the crooks.
The list of past and present good, professional, hard working, and dedicated LBPD officers is far longer than any list of misconduct or crimes you could produce, Ruehle. It always has been and it always will be.
The list of commendable, excellent and sometimes even valorous and heroic conduct of past and present LBPD officers would take volumes and volumes to publish and grows even more voluminous with each hour of every single shift of police officers LBPD fields each day.
Every single act of officer misconduct is unacceptable and inexcusable but such acts are by far the exception rather than the rule that you like to try to deceive people into believing.
Serious acts of officer misconduct at LBPD are sensational and notable precisely *because* they are so very atypical…so very uncommon.
But you keep emphasizing the poor and the worst among our police officers while all but ignoring the average, the good, and the exceptional among them. As is the case with any large metropolitain police force, LBPD is neither perfect nor flawless. But it is a far more professional and outstanding police force than you will ever be able to bring yourself to acknowledge.
I find that very sad.
I went to the site of the shooting with Doug’s Sister and Mom tonight. Eden and I looked in at the stairway where Doug sat and just above at the window where the police were observing him. To any reasonable person, there is just no sense to what happened. It is a matter of several feet and Doug posed no threat to anyone he was so enclosed. Even if he had a gun instead of the water nozzle, he was no threat. Please tell me that the Long Beach Police have learned something from what they call “a mistake of fact”. Please tell me there’s something to protect the many people who go out drinking in the Belmont Shore every night as American Youth have done for generations.
Greet – then this must be one of those “atypical” cases that the media and the community is extremely upset about. If a cop can’t observe a suspect for 10 minutes within close range and not know it wasn’t a gun, retraining needs to happen. If they can watch him for 10 minutes and not announce themselves and open fire on someone who didn’t know they were there, retraining needs to happen. What actually needs to happen is training on how not to shoot. There were plenty of ways to remedy this situation which they never did. You have to admit they did an extremely subpar performance that day and who pays for a bad day at work, Doug, his family, son friends and the faith of this community. Unfortunately it’s not just ours. This is an epidemic and I am personally scared of PD. I work in the legal field behind the scenes and see exactly what these cops do. Let me tell you that it is quite unnerving. They are so protected by multiple powers and will not come down without more scrutiny and I don’t mean their “independent investigators”
With that meaning they investigate themselves. Who wants to put themselves out for a multimillion dollar lawsuit. I do commend the OC DAY for claiming blame in Kasey Thomas but that is only because there was multiple videos of that beating.
*DA
“But you keep emphasizing the poor and the worst among our police officers while all but ignoring the average, the good, and the exceptional among them.”
the average, good and exceptional officers ALL keep quiet when one of their “brothers” commits a crime, they deserve no recognition.
@Dish: The LBPD killing of Doug Zerby was a senseless tragedy. But not all such tragedies can be prevented, much though we would prefer that they could be.
There are any number of things that the officers might have done differently, but they did not. There are also things Doug Zerby, Glen Moore and any number of others might have done differently, but they did not do those things either.
To date the facts seem to indicate that the officers followed policy, procedure, and the law in their response to and handling of the call for service that eventually led to Zerby’s killing. There is only so much the police can do…they, too, are human, and they make mistakes.
But we cannot reasonably expect them to know everything, all the time. We should not condemn them, for not acting on information we all have now, but which they did not have at the time. Critics can argue all day and all night about what the officers SHOULD have done based upon information they SHOULD have had.
But they didn’t do those things and they didn’t have that information.
They were in the process of doing precisely what they were trained to do and in the manner they were trained to do it, based upon the information they DID have, when Zerby made a move that any professional cop in the world would interpret as a deadly threat…again, based upon the information they had and the observations they were making at the time.
We can woulda-shoulda-coulda all day long. We can “what if” all year.
Zerby is dead. His death was a tragic combination of unfortunate circumstances, decisions, perceptions, and mistakes of fact. The officers who killed Zerby made a tragic and irreversible mistake.
But it was not a criminal mistake and it was not a procedural mistake and it was not a tactical mistake.
It was a mistake of fact similar to many such mistakes police officers in the U.S. have made throughout more than two centuries of the existence of readily concealable firearms…reasonably mistaking something to be a handgun that later tragically proved to be something else.
Zerby’s family and friends want justice, as they define that term. There may never be any to be had in this case. The civil suit may result in a judgment against the officers, the department, and the city or it may not.
The city may offer to settle and try to do something, without admitting any wrong-doing, to compensate the family in some small way for the loss of their loved one.
Whatever the final results of the civil suit, I pray that Zerby, his family and friends, and the officers who mistakenly killed him, one day find some peace.
Long Beach 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’!!!
By offering his petty and juvenile attempts at insult, Ruehle demeans and cheapens the discussion of this very serious topic.
Were this a classroom, he’d no doubt be back in the corner, wearing a dunce cap and shooting spitwads at others who are actually trying to learn somehing. Such is the lack of maturity that Ruehle typically exhibits during most any discussion or debate.
First of all Greet, its not so hard to see where you lean in the favor of officers. That is your right. Many of us TOO have police officer friends or in fact have been in Law enforcement. In the Police community they are a family who covers each other’s back and its hard to cut that bond so I will attempt it right now. I agree with a little of what you said and Disagree with a little as well. The persuasive writer above that you are being smug about I believe did an accurate job in his descriptive facts. He actually gave Facts. You know we weren’t allowed to know the facts for HOW LONG? Do you know the facts? Do you know what ” Facts” might not be accurate facts as reported? Many of these facts are only known by a few people that day. What we do know is someone made a call and didn’t know the facts which set in motion a horrible tragedy. We do know the Cops could observe the facts of the situation with enough daylight from their close distance to see what was going on. WAS he acting erratic and flipping out so as to really appear to be a threat and one of that cops would consider a risk of taking off on foot (while in that chair)? NO! Was there adrenaline pumping in Doug’s body as he sat mellowly in the chair minding his own business? NO! How many shots were fired? Do we Really have to have our cops Shoot to KILL instead of shoot and reassess. I have been in many situations where you could have to shoot and analyze the result but this notion that when cops shoot they shoot their guns empty or just short of empty is B.S. The first shot is a shoot to kill and if (s)he goes down, you keep the gun trained on him and then do a threat assessment and take it from there. Gets some Balls please. There is a difference of a non threat, a minor threat and a life and death threat where the subject is shooting at you. You do not just keep on shooting.PERIOD. How long does it take you or me to watch someone CLEARLY ACT DRUNK OR VIOLENT? I would think these on the Belmont Shore Patrol would have some history of what a highly intoxicated person looks like and in fact I have personally tackled one who had a gun but he couldn’t fight his way out of a paper sack. Different situations require different assessments. This assessment didn’t take into consideration Doug’s life or the lack of being erratic. I would like to see the exact rifle scope from the exact distance and see what I can observe. In FACT I think we should know the details of that scope as to compare magnification at that distance. I know what I can see at much farther distances with a high power scope and I would be willing to bet you would be amazed at what he saw. I would like to see that test done right now while the light and days and the sun are all in the same position. DO you remember the quote from the police of the “clicking noise” when a cylinder spins? If not look it up. As we know there never was a clicking noise from the Phantom Cyclinder of the six shooter that he was alleged to have. A lot of what I have said and will say revolves around that comment. An absolute lie to try and give them reason to believe it was a gun. THERE WAS NO CLICKING NOISE. Reason I know this. That nozzle doesn’t click. If you do not believe me then I invite them to try it. Was Dougs cheeks moving when this so called clicking noise was made? L.B.P.D. has went with their version of events and it doesn’t add up. Oh and more importantly……Give people the right to surrender until the facts can be confirmed. We are innocent until proven guilty. Those cops were the Judge ,Jury and Executioner. The cop who laughed while walking back to his car after the shots telling a spectator ” We got him”, Look at how he said it. I know cops that are stoned face as can be but when you kill someone you better not be laughing. Anyone out there knows of this video? Look it that part. Thats not professional nor is it compassionate and that in itself worries me as it should you. I am a supporter of Police all over and especially our Long Beach Police and have many years of interaction with them. Some I would call great friends and some I would not. . It doesnt mean I have to put my head in the sand when this happens. Almost a year for the names to be released was pathetic. I absolutely agree with their being Many Honorable L.B. Police Officers that Have Once served and the Present Officers today who truly want to Serve and Protect. I know many of them. There are a few bad apples in this bunch and thats with anything. The difference is I do not have to accept bad apples nor should anyone. I wonder what it costs to retrain these officers. Its called a refresher course. I wonder how many in Long Beach and around the country would like to see these officers on a probation status as to observe and report their mentality while handling varied situations. Oh and definitely they must ride with a senior officer. Just a thought. Do not let time erase the facts of what happened that day. Many will move on with their lives and many do not think they are directly linked to any of what happened But Remember One day that could be you, family or friend and that is not something I want to take lightly as long as I know L.B. Police reacts in the manner that they do. Imagine if your kid was playing cowboys and Indians and it was actually dark and a cop had to make a decision based on a unreliable source via a phone call. The difference is the kids would be running and playing and erratic. Not sitting and minding his own business. And according to the facts and quotes from the Chief of Police if something is aimed at an officer they have the right to shoot as an Act of self Defense. Explain that one to your child. I have.
“Were this a classroom, he’d no doubt be back in the corner, wearing a dunce cap and shooting spitwads at others who are actually trying to learn somehing. Such is the lack of maturity that Ruehle typically exhibits during most any discussion or debate.”
despite feeling this way about mike, greet never misses an opportunity to respond to mike’s comments. one wonders why greet apparently cannot control himself when it comes to mike ruehle.
Cal Pen Code § 653.2 Use of electronic communication to instill fear or to harass; Misdemeanor. (2008)
(a) Every person who, with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of the other person’s immediate family, by means of an electronic communication device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party, electronically distributes, publishes, e-mails, hyperlinks, or makes available for downloading, personal identifying information, including, but not limited to, a digital image of another person, or an electronic message of a harassing nature about another person, which would be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in the county jail, by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(b) For purposes of this section, the term “electronic communication device” includes, but is not limited to, telephones, cell phones, computers, Internet Web pages or sites, Internet phones, hybrid cellular/Internet/wireless devices, personal digital assistants (PDAs), video recorders, fax machines, or pagers. “Electronic communication” has the same meaning as the term is defined in Section 2510(12) of Title 18 of the United States Code.
(c) For purposes of this section, the following terms apply:
(1) “Harassment” means a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that a reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing the person and that serves no legitimate purpose.
(2) “Of a harassing nature” means information that a reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing the person and that serves no legitimate purpose.
how is greet not in violation of state law? heres the key phrase
“Of a harassing nature” means information that a reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing the person and that serves no legitimate purpose.”
no right minded person could claim greet hasnt been “seriously annoying” personally i would advise mike ruehle to avail himself of this statute and put an end to greet’s stalking and harassment.
I wonder why this page will not print what I typed. I of course presented some good topics. Come on moderator.
I think howardx is stalking me. Kinda weird that he always feels compelled to comment on my comments this way.
Nah, Greet is just parroting my Greet dunce hat and cyber-stalking comments I used on him in earlier posts. Notice that Greet has NEVER had an original thought about anything.
I do miss his earlier posts where he attempted to write in early 1900 Victoriana speech parroting the work of John Stuart Mill. That was a hoot.
Mike Ruehle whines when others may offer somewhat disparaging remarks about him. He then proceeds an inappropriate response to reasonable comments aimed at another post. Mike Ruehle…….man among himself.
if i were to follow you from website to website, as you demonstrably have done to mike ruehle, then it would be stalking. if i were to follow you from website to website telling all and sundry about your criminal conviction, as you have demonstrably done to mike ruehle, then it would be harassment. perhaps you think your position as a former leo will shield you, i wouldnt count on that.
Considering recently retired long beach police officer has posted on this web site that he still carries a gun, should I be concerned? How about the horse?
Hi janis! Wow, another Ruehle sycophant slinks out of the woodwork to pile on! Interesting, but not entirely unexpected.
sounds to me like youve been placed in “reasonable fear for his or her safety” by “by means of an electronic communication device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment”
(c) For purposes of this section, the following terms apply:
(1) “Harassment” means a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that a reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing the person and that serves no legitimate purpose.
(2) “Of a harassing nature” means information that a reasonable person would consider as seriously alarming, seriously annoying, seriously tormenting, or seriously terrorizing the person and that serves no legitimate purpose.
do you consider greet’s stalking of you over the past several years “seriously annoying”? does greet’s stalking of you over the last several years serve a legitimate purpose? a judge or jury may not think calling people on their “rancid rhetorical bile” to be a compelling argument for the legitimacy of greet’s campaign of harassment.
Hi KMAN: The compliments I offered to Dave were entirely sincere and no smugness was felt or intended.
I only support officers who I truly believe to be professionals doing the very best they can under often extremely difficult circumstances. I have no sympathy nor offer any excuse for any police officer who commits misconduct and no tolerance for any former officer convicted of committing a crime.
I only know the facts that are available to the rest of the public. Those facts apparently support the officers’ explanation of what happened and how. As I have said, perhaps the private investigation will uncover other facts not yet seen. If so, I may re-evaluate my opinion on this matter. I have said that also.
You and others are free to make all the assumptions you like about what the officers could see and what they couldn’t or what they heard and what they didn’t. I choose to believe that this happened precisely as has been reported and precisely in the way that it has been reported to have happened. I choose to believe this because the three separate investigations concluded or supported the conclusion of how this terrible tragedy occurred. Investigations that uncovered and had access to far more of the facts than you or I have.
I’m not sure what sort of personal experience you may have or who your friends are, but from my personal perspective, based upon almost 30 years of police work in Long Beach -which includes personal knowledge of the abilities and professionalism of one of the officers involved here- I can easily see how this terrible tragedy could have occurred with no officer misconduct or tactical or procedural errors involved.
Perhaps your experience or your friends’ experience teaches you otherwise. I am more than willing to accept and respect that. Why does that seem so very difficult for you to do in turn?
Considering that Ruehle has freely acknowledged on this site and others that he has a documented history of criminal conduct, should I be concerned? How about the rest of the community?
the only thing you should be concerned about is your complete lack of originality…that and being charged under california’s cyberstalking laws as seen above.
Greet, Forgive me for misreading your emotion on the editorial work that is being discussed. I see a lot of your wording being in favor of good cops and you not being in favor of bad cops. That we all should commend. Without getting crazy into depth here and detailing what we truly do not know. I do know you have experience and that is a plus in understanding what is at stake here. Not all investigations seem to extract the truth of what really happened at any event that warrants investigating. I would put money on it that you have looked through a high power scope at one time in your life. Wouldn’t it be great if you stood up to your own people or if just for a non biased approach did the measurements and took the lighting into account and tell me what you could be capable of seeing. I know this could be a gamble but I again I would bet money that the back up officer himself said “Oh Crap” when the other officers shot Doug. He didn’t shoot and he was back up for support. Do you really think those officers HEARD THE CLICKS OF THE REVOLVING CYLINDER? Why don’t you vindicate yourself (if you care to and do not if You Don’t) and see if you could replicate any sound with that nozzle. Its not going to happen BUT Officers have to say something when they screw up. You know this and I know. That being said ,Yes It is tragic that this happened and even a finger being pointed in your direction can be questioned for a gun. But Long Beach Officers get paid big time dollars to be the best and not to be any different. That oath you take is Sacred. Damn to hell anyone who takes it lightly and lies. I have seen many. If a civilian lies to a officer it is a crime. If a cop lies to a civilian it is not. This I have many years of proof . Judgement day comes for all and liars according to scripture will not fair well. Lets touch on the Asian Officer who when asked by the guy on the street, ” Did you get the guy with the gun”, Why did the Asian officer smile and half laughed when answering Oh yea We did? Give or take a word or two there is that appropriate? That sets off emotion to many here are are offended by the character in question. I know I do not like someone’s life being taken and most likely the officers who did the shooting probably have had nightmares about it. A sad thing for many to experience. DO YOU AGREE with the officer Smiling about it? That answer will be important to whether you care about people here on this blog understanding your mindset. That video has be taken down at least I cannot find it. But it happened and I think that doesnt help public thought for these officers. Again I agree with a lot of what you said and text writing does not show emotion I think its best you and the others you have be going at it with for a while need a break. They will never accept you and you will never accept them. This investigation has holes in it and the city officials are not looking out for the community of Long Beach. Mistakes happen in all of our lives but We all should answer to them and not lie at the expense of someones life. Being an officer can be hell at times and quite often you do the work without recognition and you do put your life on the line. I just do not buy into the professionalism of this Experienced Officer not recognizing a Non Violent Erratic subject who didn’t fit the profile of someone who may Take off into the neighborhood and hurt people based on the report of a caller. The cops had cover and tools to utilize to react to this situation. What did dispatch say when putting out the call? You have to take that with a grain of salt. The Caller who admittedly doesn’t know much about Six Shooters or whatever the heck they said isn’t a reliable source which proves to be accurate in this case. Did Doug’s eyes ever see the officers who shot him.Without a fact or two for me to really crush this thought What was the reflection of the glass at the sliding door? Did the officers turn off any inside lights that would give their position away? Simple questions I hope get answered and I hope the caller can answer someday in court under oath. Could Doug see the officers? Do you really think the cops believe that Doug Spotted them and was ready to open fire on them? Because that would be an abrupt change in his actions leading up to that event. The cops were hidden so That would seem doubtful. Both cops know it and the sniper who Didn’t fire knows it. What is done is done but its Not forgotten and don’t expect Doug’s friends and family and supporters who honor his life to just lie down and be quiet. That would be an injustice to Doug and the positive life he could have lived out here in Long Beach. I will not go round and round with you Greet. This isnt about personally attacking you. You and I know what is at stake for everyone involved. This will probably be my last response. I respectfully disagree with the officers involved and those who were puppets from a higher source to say what they say. Maybe one day a whistle blower will come out and share the facts. Until then, Doug’s child is due compensation for the officers overreaction. The child deserves to be given a great opportunity at life and his future without his dad. Who can argue with that? He has a great family who will be there for him. Thank God for that . Do the right thing Long Beach.
Here we go again, Bozo Greet needs another definition “Sycophant-noun
a self-seeking, servile flatterer; fawning parasite.” How exactly can I be a “Ruhele Sycophant” …supposing I’m self-seeking (instead of for Ruehle), a servile flatterer (to whom?) or a fawning parasite (on whom)”. You Greet on the other hand brown nose any and every public official you can while at the same time sucking up government dollars. YOU ARE THE SYCOPHANT. Guess you are just parroting something someone else said and have no idea what it means.
Yes there are more than a few independent people who think you are an bombastic ignorant idiot. At this point Greet is going to lecture all of on intellectual discourse and manners. Greets keeps playing the same old broken record no matter what the subject is and wonders why he gets no respect.
Greet “Hi janis! Wow, another Ruehle sycophant slinks out of the woodwork to pile on! Interesting, but not entirely unexpected.”
I couldnt resist one more comment. Your quote: “I only support officers who I truly believe to be professionals doing the very best they can under often extremely difficult circumstances. I have no sympathy nor offer any excuse for any police officer who commits misconduct and no tolerance for any former officer convicted of committing a crime.
I only know the facts that are available to the rest of the public. Those facts apparently support the officers’ explanation of what happened and how. As I have said, perhaps the private investigation will uncover other facts not yet seen. If so, I may re-evaluate my opinion on this matter. I have said that also.”
I appreciate this quote and we all should give you the benefit of the doubt in meaning what you say. I think its genuine coming from a human with a conscience standpoint and hoping you mean sincerely what you say. Any other arguments you have going with others I am not looking at. BUT…….when you say: ” Those facts apparently support the officers’ explanation of what happened and how” What does “Apparrent” really mean and does it hold value to the truth. Dead men tell no tales. There are no witnesses other than the cops in question. Doesnt that allow anything to be said and since a Judge in court will always take the word of the officer when there is no evidence to prove otherwise Its the officers word who wins every time. Everyone of us reading this knows this. I want to see constructive talk not bashing. Just facts and opinions because thats what really matters here. That goes for everyone on here . There is a long road ahead . When I see judges parked in handicapped spaces with no placard and the fact that the judge has no health issues(this is fact) and he has no worry of conviction that doesnt give me hope. Abuse of power has went on since the beginning of time. I hope justice is served and we all can work on a more honest future for Long Beach. While we are at it we should have a political change as well take place. That’s another day another time.
Copied and understood on your comments, KMAN. Thanks.
Ruehle-sycophant janis follows the typically insulting pattern of her cohorts howardx and wrongbeach. They offer little to nothing of a constructive nature to virtually any conversation. They never seem to take exception to Ruehle’s many falsehoods and fraudulent tactics but consistently condemn me when I dare to call him on them.
Whenever I ask Ruehle to cite his sources for an assertion I believe to be questionable, he fails to do so. Never a word from the sycophants about his lack of ability to offer proof. How convenient.
Whenever I point out a falsehood Ruehle commits, prove that he has done so, and ask that he acknowledge his falsehood and correct the record, he ignores the request and moves on to other falsehoods and other fraud. Never a word from the sycophants about his unwillingness to acknowledge or to correct his falsehoods. How typical.
Ruehle routinely heaps falsehood, upon fraud, upon childish offering of insult on this site and others and rather than encourage him to conduct himself in a more mature, respectful and intellectually honest manner, his sycophants follow happily along, joining right in with him like the petty little schoolyard bullies they present themselves to be.
They are a sad, sad lot, the four of them.
greet KMAN verbally slapped the shit out of you, which wasn’t very hard to do, and all you could do was thank him? Nice of him to take the time and effort to do that, but for me to spend more than a minute on you is a big waste of time. You are nothing but a phony POS and too shameless to even be embarrassed. Fact is, like KMAN, we’re on to you. Loser.
Let’s see. The officer who has a “gun” pointed directly at him by an individual with arms extended in a “two-handed shooting posture” DOESN’T SHOOT until he hears the sound of gunfire??
Does that even make sense?
Wouldn’t an officer who concluded he was ABOUT TO have a pistol pointed directly at him from close range PREEMPT that action BY FIRING on the individual BEFORE he was able to adopt a “two-handed shooting posture?”
Well Panglo, If you believe the series of events That have been reported by the group trying to save their butts then you would wonder that. Do you think the Back Up Police officer with the rifle and scope who didn’t fire (which is actually out of character when it seems cops always back each other up when the shooting begins) knows more then you and I? I venture to believe that. I believe he himself knows that it was a surprise when his fellow officers started shooting. I raise great points in earlier talks. Unless anyone is going to answer those points then its all BS. Do you know how Iran’s Nuclear Facility was bombed? No you sure do not. Nor does 99.999% percent of the world. But someone does. We all are not privy to info that transpires in these events and when there are no witnesses( again the caller can step forward anytime to dispute any questions) then we are left wondering but what we do know is he wasn’t flipping out and acting like a runner with a gun. I would hope I would get the chance to be notified of a officers presence before being shot at repeatedly. It wasn’t in a bad neighborhood and the fact is the officers got a little excited. The second officer who admittedly shot in response to the fellow officers gun firing makes my point of how many shots does it take to bring someone down( especially one not in an adrenalin rage? The officer with the rifle who didn’t fire……….Why do you think he didn’t fire Panglo? Do you think it is possible for him to have Not Wanted to fire as he did not feel it was necessary? Do you think the officer who fired in response to the fellow officer couldnt see that Doug was shot in the first shot and did they really need to keep firing? I am sick of the BS you Anti Doug’s Rights bloggers bring to these forums. It takes an open mind but with a little effort you might see the different angles . Not to get personal with your professions here but there could be a chance you are not trained in firearms and or situations BUT those L.B. officers were. You cannot say Doug did not deserve the right to put down whatever was in his hand. My boy held a contractors square the other day and he was aiming it around all nice and mellow. Would he deserve the chance to put the object down or is he doomed the second it is aimed in the general direction of an officer who was not seen and hiding? Doug was covered from different angles? Was he hostile leading up to being shot? Sure Was Not! If every Officer went around shooting their guns repeatedly (until the subject is dead with no chance for survivability) at Everyone who pointed something towards them then it would be pretty lawless and a wild west out there. The Police Academy If I am correct doesn’t teach you: If your fellow officer fires then you back him up and fire beyond what is necessary even if you didn’t see why he was firing. That is reckless. Remember that is an admission from the officer. Oh one more thing Panglo……..when you reference a “gun” and “pistol” and “ABOUT TO”, YOU REMEMBER THERE WAS NO PISTOL OR GUN EVER FOUND and your comment “ABOUT TO” is only known by several people and one of them is Doug. Doug cannot defend himself right now and The officers I seriously doubt will come forward and claim Yea We probably should not have shot and we acted like rookies. I also do not think the officers planned on taking ones life that day but there MUST be ACCOUNTABILITY. It is also not only in Hollywood that they announce themselves: “This is the Police”. That phrase is actually still used all over the world,Just not that day in Long Beach!
wrongbeach: KMAN and I agree on some points and disagree on others. I wasn’t interested in engaging with him further on our points of disagreement so I paid him the simple courtesy of letting him know I understood what he was saying and thanked him for offering me his views. Simple courtesy, wrongbeach. No ad hominem attacks, no name calling necessary. You really should try it some time.
Hi Pan!: Yes, it can make perfect sense. There are at least a couple of completely plausible explanations. People’s reaction times to perceived threats are different. Perhaps Shurtleff simply had a slightly faster reaction time. Perhaps Otriz had not yet racked a round into the chamber of his shotgun. For safey reasons these weapons are not mounted in the police cars with a round in the chamber, so the slide has to be cycled and a round chambered before an officer can fire the weapon. Perhaps Ortiz was chambering his first round while Shurtleff was alreasy firing in response to the threat they each perceived. This is entirely speculative, of course, but those are two very reasonable explanations for why Shurtleff fired first.
As to shooting a person preemptively, no. Officers do not have the luxury of responding to a threat that is “about to” happen. The “Future Crimes Unit” only exists in the movies.
The threat an officer percieves must be immediate and it must be clearly articulable. A suspect simply holding a handgun pointed downward and not in anyone’s direction is not presenting an immediate threat to anything but the ground. Once he or she moves to point the weapon in the direction (or even the possible direction) of others, however, the perceived threat become immediate and the officer can (must) use the force necessary to stop that perceived threat.
I recall a news story of an officer involved shooting (OIS) once in which a suspect was armed with a handgun and holding it straight down at his side. Initial video footage appeared to show the officer simply shooting and killing the suspect at this point. Closer analysis of the video footage, however, revealed what the officer reported had actually happened. The suspect, while leaving his arm in place, straight down at his side, had very slowly and almost imperceptably starting moving his hand so as to point the gun at the officer. The officer could see this and, at the point where it was clear to the officer that the suspect was about to be able to shoot him, the officer used the force necessary to stop that very real threat.
Reaction times differ. Perceptions differ. Manipulating a pump-action shotgun takes time. Officers must react to deadly threats they perceive to be immediate and they must be able to articulate precisely what they saw and heard and why they took the actions they did.
John B. Greet
December 14, 2011
wrongbeach: KMAN and I agree on some points and disagree on others. I wasn’t interested in engaging with him further on our points of disagreement so I paid him the simple courtesy of letting him know I understood what he was saying and thanked him for offering me his views. Simple courtesy, wrongbeach.
Bullshit greet we know why you didn’t “engage”. Loser.
Ah yes, the typical rude and insulting manner that characterizes the Ruehle-sycophant. Nice to know you’re running true to form this morning, wrongbeach!
Behavior Problems May Stem from Cry Baby Syndrome
http://www.whybuyanewspaper.com/health/behavior-problems-may-stem-from-cry-baby-syndrome/428372/
Ruehle sycophants like howardx are constantly seeking to better understand themselves. I think this is very commendable and a healthy way to try to improve upon the various anti-social challenges they apparently experience in their personal lives.
I have one for you Panglo…….Your choice of words of the Officer CONCLUDING is interesting. That is valid if you believe it. You see we do not believe that chain of events and believe the Officer should have exercised some options. Remember the Rifleman who saw it all didnt shoot. Technically he could have according to Police Rights to Shoot(opinions of course vary here) I wonder why that is? Do you know panglo? That officer does and I am not so sure he has came out and under oath told us why he decided to not back up the officers with a few extra bullets. He is the precision shot with the positioning and time in his favor. HE DIDNT SEE A SITUATION ARISE WORTH SHOOTING AT. His fellow officers jumped the gun. If I was in my backyard with a water nozzle Or gun and was aiming it around and the officer came (because of a second story neighbor reported me ) and I was aiming up by the tree which blocks all view in my backyard alley ,should I be shot repeatedly and killed for that? Private property, minding my own business,exercising my 2nd Amendment Right’s. Game Wardens go through this in the wild and you do not see them open firing on hunters. They do a lot of their work in Stealth Recon mode and go undercover sometimes to bust people. They could say a gun was pointed at them But it doesnt seem to happen(It doesnt this I know) and My guess is the Assessment Value. Dispatch receives a Call and say’s there is a guy rocking back and forth with a gun. Instead of Observe and Report it was We are not sure but we will go ahead and shoot and ask questions Later. We the people deserve that right. As for the Officer who didnt cycle a round yet…………until time to fire? NO do not think so. That is an officer who pulled a rookie mistake going into this so called danger zone. Do I believe that? No! Officer may have took their eyes off the subject while positioning themselves or whatever BUT because another officer fires you start firing. Reckless. I have had guns pointed at me when the other person had NO clue I was in the line of fire. I was comfortable with my position so the subject got the benefit of the doubt and right to life because I knew differently. 8 minutes of hiding and no reason to believe their cover was blown. Did the report say that at anytime Doug pointed the nozzle up and around in those 8 minutes? That would tell us something of his mindset and actions in those very quiet times of sitting down. I have to move on now to work. Please tell me anyone who responds will do so to the questions asked throughout my efforts to enlighten the Anti Doug Right’s Believers. Ignoring them doesnt do much for fact finding but just more jibber.
The “Dominance-Submissive Authoritarian Embrace” is a social phenomenon that sociologists, historians, psychologists and other social scientists cite as being largely responsible for disasters such as the Holocaust. It happens whenever a charismatic leader is able to exert control over enough followers that this single person is made capable of directing events leading to a level of destruction like that seen during WW2.
While most accounts of the days leading up to Hitler’s dictatorship tell us of a “hypnotic” influence he exerted over the general public, few point out which political stripe it was that was most charmed by his presence and message. As it turns out, research done after WW2 specifically done in an attempt to discover what had actually taken place in the minds of so many “normal” Germans has resulted in the discovery of what is now known as the “authoritarian personality syndrome”. Hitler’s most loyal followers almost always displayed authoritarian personality traits.
The root cause of this syndrome is still debated, but what is known is that their cognitive-social-intellectual development remains immature into adulthood. It leaves them with limited abilities for deciding questions that require the ability to think in abstract and complex ways. Instead they seek out authority figures who will (and do) inform even their most basic decisions for them. As a result, persons so afflicted seek out careers in law-enforcement or to the military where thinking for oneself is not promoted.
It would be an outstanding outcome of this sad event if Long Beach could acquire a state-of-the-art civilian review board for police actions that arouse the amount of rancor that the Zerby shooting has generated.
If any local politico wanted to establish an adamantine trust with the public in these days of pepper-spray-harsh police activities, this would seem a natural.
It seems as if elected officials are afraid of the police. Maybe that’s why they like to reduce their number to solve funding shortfalls.
What are the odds of a meaningful review board being established in the next year?
i remain convinced the rising tide of police violence will erode the power the police unions hold over local politicians due to citizen disgust. while i dont think it will happen in the next year i would say in 2-3 we will see some sort of review board set up. if im wrong and the police unions hold sway then i say never.
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day –- Risking Everything
“It has been said that we need just three things in life: Something to do, Something to look forward to And someone to love.” — Author Unknown
“When I saw you, I was afraid to meet you… When I met you, I was afraid to kiss you… When I kissed you, I was afraid to love you… Now that I love you, I’m afraid to lose you.” — Author Unknown
“It is a curious thought, but it is only when you see people looking ridiculous that you realize just how much you love them.” — Agatha Christie
“Love is what makes two people sit in the middle of a bench when there is plenty of room at both ends.” –- Author Unknown
“Do you want me to tell you something really subversive? Love is everything it’s cracked up to be. That’s why people are so cynical about it. It really is worth fighting for, being brave for, risking everything for. And the trouble is, if you don’t risk anything, you risk even more.” — Erica Jong
“If I never met you, I wouldn’t like you. If I didn’t like you, I wouldn’t love you. If I didn’t love you, I wouldn’t miss you. But I did, I do, and I will.” –- Author Unknown
“There is a sacredness in tears. They are not the mark of weakness, but of power. They speak more eloquently than ten thousand tongues. They are messengers of overwhelming grief… and unspeakable love.” — Washington Irving
(Source: thinkexist.com)
@KMAN
I agree that the statement of the officer with the telescopic site trained on Zerby is key – its omission, glaring.
It’s very hard to see how the conclusions of the investigations can be deemed factual and complete *without* public disclosure of that officer’s statements.
-
@John
From D.A. Cooley’s report dated 11/3/2011:
“…Ortiz saw Zerby direct his attention to the southwest at the location where Ortiz believed that other officers were positioned.
Zerby then looked directly at Ortiz’s position. Zerby raised the ‘firearm’ with his right hand and grasped his right hand with his left hand in a shooting position.
Zerby pointed the ‘handgun’ directly at Ortiz’s position. In response to these actions, Ortiz took his shotgun off safety and placed his finger on the trigger.
At that moment, Ortiz heard gunshots. Believing that Zerby was shooting at him, Ortiz fired his shotgun at Zerby.”
-
Given Officer Ortiz’ statement, and in light of your comment:
“Once [a suspect] moves to point the weapon in the direction (or even the possible direction) of others, however, the perceived threat become immediate and the officer can (must) use the force necessary to stop that perceived threat.”
…the likely reason that Ortiz would NOT FIRE PREEMPTIVELY would be if he did NOT feel himself to be in “imminent danger.”
No?
@US Blues: I agree that Long Beach can and should re-evaluate the CPCC and make changes that may better meet the publics needs in this area. However, if the majority of voters in Long Beach are doing their jobs and electing representatives they can trust to, in turn, appoint others who can help them, help us, to properly monitor our police department, then a separate entity such as the CPCC would not even be necessary.
It all comes back to us, the voters, and what sort of government we want or are willing to tolerate.
“Zerby pointed the ‘handgun’ directly at Ortiz’s position. In response to these actions, Ortiz took his shotgun off safety and placed his finger on the trigger.”
THAT comment does not mean He would have to take his eye off of the subject just to put a safety off! Period. Done it 1,000′s of times without having to look at it.
“At that moment, Ortiz heard gunshots. Believing that Zerby was shooting at him, Ortiz fired his shotgun at Zerby.”
HE BELIEVED he was being shot at? So what we know from Admissions by that officer he actually shot Doug without actually knowing why he should be shooting. What if the officer next to him was wrong in firing………which we know was, YOu back him up without processing the facts? Thats called cops backing up cops and manipulate stories afterwards if need be. These little or Big facts can be misinterpreted in many ways. Dissect them one at a time and they don’t confirm well trained officers. Were bullets flying through the window? If his eye was trained on Doug then HE WOULD HAVE KNOWN HE WASNT BEING FIRED AT. Shoot someone once with their shotgun load which load of buckshot they were using( not Birdshot) and you tell me if he was still a threat after the first shot let alone from the other officer. I DONT THINK SO. Again reckless shooting and assessments and Thank God a neighbor was hurt in the process behind where Doug Was SITTING.
-
Given Officer Ortiz’ statement, and in light of your comment:
“Once [a suspect] moves to point the “weapon” in the direction (or even the possible direction) of others, however, the perceived threat become immediate and the officer can (must) use the force necessary to stop that perceived threat.”
A Garden nozzle IS NOT A WEAPON UNLESS THROWN AT YOU.PERIOD. ANYTHING CAN BE ANYTHING YOU WANT IT TO BE WHEN TRYING TRYING TO GET YOURSELF OUT OF A LAWSUIT OR CRIMINAL CHARGES. The fact is Its the duty of the cops to Protect and Serve and that goes for everyone who is innocent until proven guilty.
…the likely reason that Ortiz would NOT FIRE PREEMPTIVELY would be if he did NOT feel himself to be in “imminent danger.”
If I understand you there correctly…………..EXACTLY. DID NOT is Key here. You be amazed at the power and control you have with a shotgun and lots of backup. They F&*@ed Up here and thats the facts. Maybe in another year we can learn more about this case. It does seem to take forever and ever for any answers.
@Pan: I disagree with your analysis. It sounds to me as if Ortiz was in the process of engaging the suspect, using his shotgun, when he heard the shots being fired, and then continued that process by firing at what he perceived the deadly threat to be. One clue that some (who have not received extensive and on-going police training in firearms) may understandably overlook is the phrase:
“Zerby pointed the ‘handgun’ directly at Ortiz’s position. In response to these actions, Ortiz took his shotgun off safety and placed his finger on the trigger.”
Professional police officers are taught -and this teaching is reinforced constantly under the often ungentle tutelage of the rangemasters- to keep their fingers off their triggers unless/until they are ready to engage the target…e.g., to actually fire their weapon….to send rounds downrange.
That Ortiz not only took the shotgun off-safety but also placed his finger on the trigger, indicates to me that he was in the process of engaging the deadly threat he perceived and that hearing the gunshots during that process only served to support and validate his perceptions.
All of this is rhetorical of course. Only Ortiz knows what was going on in his own mind at that moment. But I was honored to know and serve with Ortiz for several years and I never witnessed anything about his judgment or his behavior while on duty that caused me to question either.
Zerby pointed the ‘handgun’ directly at Ortiz’s position. In response to these actions, Ortiz took his shotgun off safety and placed his finger on the trigger.
At that moment, Ortiz heard gunshots. Believing that Zerby was shooting at him, Ortiz fired his shotgun at Zerby.”
With that said……….How close were the officers to each other? I do not have that detail in front of me right now. I wonder how close Ortiz was to the other officer when he thought it was Dougs Water nozzle firing. Sounds like some rookie type cops here. Years behind a badge doesnt guarantee you will make the right decison and process correctly everything thrown at you. We are not perfect and thats a tough one. BUT Add up admissions by the cops and measurements etc things do not always add up. Just my opinion and many many others.
With that said Greet, I agree with much of that and Especially the Only Ortiz knows. Without going into detail I know the training of the Range master and that is correct. But if I was the man on the grassy knoll you can bet I would have squeezed a round off IF Doug did in fact fire. That officer was 100 percent involved with Doug in his sights? He didnt fire because again I think he was in awe how it went down. In all honesty this could go on forever. Keep up the fight for Doug’ and everyone’s rights to be free and if approached be careful and respectful as that is the closest responsible thing you can do to keep the officers relaxed. You never know when they will interpret your Cell Phone or Corn Dog for a weapon while sitting down in your chair or a park bench. They owe us that much to make the distinction first before the shooting begins. Dougs Kid is fatherless and LONG BEACH better step up. City Officials do not have to be afraid of cops or the next election. Speak up. You will answer to a higher authority one day. Be right with yourself and God. Police Chiefs should never be pressured by City Officials to do the right thing .They should do it from the start. If anyone has the info on the Riflemans involvement let it be known. His Scope and proximity to Doug is key here. If Doug Fired his nozzle the Rifleman would have fired instinctively (If he was doing his job and paying attention) and he did not. That isnt a coincidence.
Interesting, gents. Aren’t these three primary officers (with guns trained on Zerby) communicating with each other (and/or command) via radio? And wouldn’t that communication be recorded?
@KMAN
Here’s that video you were looking for (I think):
http://patch.com/A-n0b2#youtube_video-8542635
embedded (along with other video, pics and docs) at an article with comment thread at the Belmont Shore Patch site.
I would have provided it earlier but sometimes comments with links here get sent to moderation and I wanted to keep the conversation immediate.
-Pan
Another example of biased, camouflaged “reporting”, sympathetic to the Zerby cause.
At first, the author makes believe it is an objective story. As one reads on, we discover more and more of the same Zerby propaganda that has plastered the newspaper websites of the local, Long Beach community for the past year.
The story contains many inaccuracies and inconsistencies, at times, contradicting its own content.
The Zerby’s and their cohorts should move on. Instead of squawking about police brutality, perhaps they should direct their efforts to organizations designed to reduce alcoholism and public inebriation…that was Mr. Zerby’s true killer.
Pan: Police radio traffic is digitally recorded for many reasons. I feel confident that any recorded radio traffic was provided to, and evaluated by, the D.A. I suspect that the plaintiffs will receive this as well, whether voluntarily or via subpoena.
Earlier today, I submitted an entry to this blog which was not favorable to and, in fact, disputed the events portrayed in this “pseudo article” and the propaganda submitted to local, newspaper websites by the Zerby family and its cohorts.
What was the result? The editor of this page reviewed the submission and chose not to publish it.
Not surprised. Balanced reporting doesn’t exist within the network of friends and propaganda artists that the Zerby’s have recruited since this tragedy.
@Shawn, I can see your earlier comment. Perhaps it just wasn’t moderated as quickly as you would’ve liked, but it’s charming how you assumed that the editor lacked “balanced reporting” by not posting your extremely valuable comment.
I get moderated all the time and I don’t whine about it.
youre a douchebag shawn, we’ve already got a resident victim blamer here in john greet. dont need another.
shawn, you must have been drinking too much again. I can see both of your comments just fine. To improve your eyesight, have you considered looking into organizations designed to reduce alcoholism and public inebriation?
Meanwhile, be careful to not get shot by a Long Beach cop. Death by multiple gunshots is police punishment for public intoxication.
howardx misinterprets my comments in the only way his apparently shallow mind can manage, then offers insults based upon his own poor understanding.
I have said that many circumstances could have been different on that tragic day, including some that Zerby, himself, certainly had conscious control over.
I have also said the no one deserves to be shot for playing with a hose nozzle but of course that is not why the police shot Zerby. That’s simply the way those who are over-anxious to condemn the police prefer to mischaracterize this terrible event.
A lot of good people in the U.S. get shot and killed every year who do not “deserve” to be.
On average between 40-70 of those good people are police officers who are murdered by gunfire every year (not killed by mistake, but intentionally murdered) just for trying to do the jobs we ask them to do for us.
In no other public or private sector profession -other than military personnel engaged in combat- are people routinely murdered just for trying to do their jobs.
I think it is sad that none of those who are so outraged about the Zerby killing, granted a terribly tragic mistake of fact, seem unable to spare any of their outrage for the dozens and dozens of professional police officers throughout our state and nation who are murdered by gunfire each and every year, just for trying to do their jobs.
strange and stupid answer, why arent we talking about the dozens of police officers shot in the line of duty? possibly because this article isnt about them? could it be that since this article is about the police murdering a local citizen we are discussing that? idiot.
ps.
despite your incredibly self serving whine about the dangers of police work it isnt even in the top 5 most dangerous jobs in america.
Could it be that I never asked why we aren’t talking about the dozens of police officers shot in the line of duty?
Could it be that some of Ruehle’s sycophants are clearly long on rudeness and short on comprehension?
p.s. Ruehle sycophants remain long on rudeness and short on comprehension. I never said other jobs weren’t more dangerous than police work. I said, in no other public or private sector profession -other than military personnel engaged in combat- are people routinely murdered just for trying to do their jobs.
Neither Loggers, Pilots, Fishermen, Iron/Steel Workers, Garbage Collectors, Farmers/Ranchers, Roofers, Electrical Power Installer/Repairers, Sales, Delivery, and Other Truck Drivers, or Taxi Driver/Chauffeurs are routinely murdered just for trying to do their jobs.
If Ruehle or any of his sycophants believe they can reasonably refute what I have actually said, they are welcome to make the attempt.
“On average between 40-70 of those good people are police officers who are murdered by gunfire every year (not killed by mistake, but intentionally murdered) just for trying to do the jobs we ask them to do for us.”
Are you assuming these officers were all killed by GUNFIRE while on duty?
Because HALF of all officers killed while on duty are from traffic accidents not guns. Just wonder where your stat is from.
John, In 100 years of the LBPD around 25 officers have died in the line of duty.
The term “line of duty” means any action which an officer is obligated or authorized to carry out, or for which the officer is compensated by the public agency he or she serves. The term “killed in the line of duty” means a law enforcement officer has died as a direct and proximate result of a personal injury sustained in the line of duty. This includes law enforcement officers who, while in an off-duty capacity, act in response to a law violation, or are DRIVING TO OR FROM WORK.
Not all fallen officers are MURDERED, most are accidents, but.. ALL the clerks reported killed at the 7/11′s were MURDERED.
taxi drivers are far more likely to be murdered “just trying to do their jobs” than the police.
refuted.
why would anyone have any outrage for these hypothetical cops youre bringing up hoping to change the subject? some people here actually knew doug zerby. your attempt to shame people into shutting up is a typically filthy greet move, reeking of desperation and intellectual dishonesty.
Last year 77 U.S. federal, state, local, tribal or territorial police officers were murdered in the line of duty. Many more than that *died* in the line of duty, of course, but these 77 were *murdered* either by gunfire, assault, or vehicular assault.
This is my source:
http://www.odmp.org/search/year?year=2010
Let’s see howardx’s statistic for taxi drivers murdered in the same jurisdictional areas over the same time frame, just for doing their jobs, and then let’s see the source for his information.
Poor howardx, still long on insult and short on comprehension.
Let’s see, within this very comment thread howardx has seen fit to share with us his considerably shallow thoughts on topics such as: cyber-stalking, crybaby syndrome, conspiracy theories about police officer silence, why I choose to make comments on topics that Ruehle also chooses to comment on, citing CPC sections that have nothing to do with the topic at hand, my alleged lack of originality, the “The “Dominance-Submissive Authoritarian Embrace”, police unions, douchebags, and taxi drivers.
Yet he accuses *me* of trying to change the subject?!?
I have neither sought to change the subject nor shame anyone into shutting up. Further, I am not responsible for anyone else’s feelings, whether of shame or any other sort.
John,
Let’s talk LB, since thats the topic.Every year aprox 0.25 police officers (25 officers Divided by 100 years) are killed in LB, and remember about half of them in accidents.
How many LB clerks have been killed ‘in the line of duty’ in a year, many many more than police officers Now if it was possible to get accurate numbers on how many unarmed LB CITIZENS have been killed by police I think the number would also be much much higher. Tell us again how dangerous a job being a cop is. I do understand being a cop CAN be dangerous but me thinks you are really reaching on this one.
Sorry greet you are still the undisputed Identified Patient.
wrongbeach, when you are right, you are right. You certainly ARE sorry….
“Citing CPC sections that have nothing to do with the topic at hand,”
perhaps not but they have everything to do with your multi year campaign of stalking and harassment directed against mike ruehle.
keep in mind greet that mentioning fallen police officers and our alleged lack of outrage over them also has nothing to “with the topic at hand” which is the police murder of doug zerby. “do what i say not what i do” hasnt ever had much appeal for me, especially from a loser like you.
Poor howardx. Why does it seem so difficult for hypocrites to deal in a constructive manner with their own hypocrisy?
I think it is blatantly hypocritical for him to presume take me to task for his misperception that I had changed the subject, when he has done the very same thing himself several times in the same thread. This idea is completely lost upon him, however, because Ruehle sycophants like him do not think the rules they presume to apply to others, should also apply to themselves. Entertaining these sorts of double-standards when dealing with others is also a common trait among Ruehle and his sycophants.
howardx has clearly illustrated it here. He wrongly accuses me of trying to change the subject. When I list the many subjects he has interjected which differ from the topic of this article, he presumes take ME to task for doing what he, himself, has done…applying a different standard to me than he clearly applies to himself.
All of this while aggressively demonstrating still another common trait among Ruehle sycophants, attempting to defend the indefensible…Ruehle and his often blatantly false, fraudulent, and misleading method of discussion and debate.
We still havent seen howardx’s statistics, or their source, for taxi drivers in the U.S. and its territories, who were killed last year just for doing their jobs. This is another common tactic among Ruehle and his sycophants, state information as if it is fact, fail to offer proof to support the assertion, and then ignore repeated requests that they provide that proof.
Hi clarity: Actually the comment I made had to do with how many U.S. federal, state, local, tribal or territorial police officers were murdered in the line of duty last year and the fact that I think it is sad that none of those who are so outraged about the Zerby killing, granted a terribly tragic mistake of fact, seem unable to spare any of their outrage for the dozens and dozens of professional police officers throughout our state and nation who are murdered by gunfire each and every year, just for trying to do their jobs.
Contrary to howardx’s erroneous assertion, this comment was not off topic. This is so because this topic deals not only with Zerby and his tragic killing, but also with police officers trying to do their jobs under very difficult circumstances. Those who are able to think more critically and dispassionately about this tragic death, may also perceive that police officers killed in the line of duty in the U.S. and its territories each year is very much ON topic here.
This is so because Zerby was shot and killed because two police officers, who were just trying to do their jobs, perceived that what he was doing at the moment they fired represented an immediate and deadly threat to themselves or others. A deadly threat which they have not only a responsibility, but a sworn duty, to take immediate and definitive action to stop.
I suggest that part of the reason the LBPD officers in this case perceived Zerby’s actions as an immediate and deadly threat was precisely BECAUSE so many police officers, just like them, are murdered, by gunfire, every single year in the U.S. and its territories. I suggest that this equally tragic routine of murder-by-gunfire of police officers is always in the back of every police officer’s mind every single shift that he or she works.
I think knowing this is important and very critical to helping us better understand the officers’ states of mind at the moment they perceived the threat they believed Zerby posed and why they took the action they did to stop it.
Ruehle and his witless sycophants do not seem to possess either the intelligence or the critical thinking skills necessary to understand this important dynamic of this terribly tragic killing
I think you and others may, however.
No axe to grind here, but I gotta say there sure are quite a few people probably suffering from narcissistic personality disorder in the comments section.
Some of these people behave as if they’re Clarence Darrow arguing the fate of the world in international court!
What the hell is WRONG with you mental patients??
Anyway, seems to me the shooting wasn’t justified, since the LBPD failed to identify themselves before shooting the man. They acted like a SWAT team at a bank robbery, or police who just cornered a known murderer, rather than dealing with a relatively sedate situation with a LOT of unknown variables that should have been considered, and plenty of time to as least gather SOME information.
I think the policeman with the rifle scope not firing, and apparently not having a published interview, is very indicative of some people “circling the wagons” to avoid large civil judgements.
I think if this had been, god forbid, a city councilman’s son or daughter who was shot dead without the police not even announcing their presence, the outcome of this shooting would have been very different.
I can’t believe LBPD procedural training includes encouragement of the police to shoot someone, unannounced, simply when they THINK the person MIGHT have a gun. If that’s so, that makes Long Beach one HELL of a scary place to live. It means I could be carrying my large wad of car and house keys, get shot, and not even know what hit me!
That just CAN’T be so!
It seems one or more officers might have done something stupid. Something they regret terribly, but was still stupid, which isn’t a defense for killing a man. I don’t think they should be tried like criminals, but walking away as “police following proper procedure” doesn’t seem right, going by what info has been produced for public consumption so far.
So… I guess bring in the feds.
PS I didn’t start out as a supporter of the Zerby’s because I didn’t like the histrionics they conducted at the early police press conferences, however, the administrative conclusion of this matter seems… unsound.
Steve
December 22, 2011
No axe to grind here, but I gotta say there sure are quite a few people probably suffering from narcissistic personality disorder in the comments section.
Hmm, wonder who he could be talking about…?
Steve, You appear to be woefully ignorant about the general standard of professional civil law enforcement training in the US today. This is a standard that is not exceeded much of anywhere else in the world other than in California and when Long Beach PD is actually allowed to conduct an academy class, we routinely exceed the training standards set for California.
Of *course* officers must be authorized to deploy deadly force in response to a perceived threat (when they think a person may have a gun). They must first perceive the threat before they can respond to it. But because cops are still human beings, their perceptions are not always 100% accurate. Depite hundreds and hundreds of hours of intensive training, tragic mistakes can still be made. Tragic mistakes just like this one.
Of *course* officers must be authorized to deploy deadly force un-announced. Sometimes there is just not time to give an announcement, or a warning, or verbalize anything else, between the time the threat is perceived, and the time that action must be taken to stop it.
Many critics of the Zerby shooting like to complain that the officers were on the scene and observing Zerby for many minutes before two of the officers shot him. I think they are guaging the wrong time frame. The proper time frame to consider is that between the time the officers perceived the threat and the time they deployed deadly force to stop it. Were we to guage THAT time frame, I believe we would likely find it measured not in many minutes, but in tenths of a second.
Federal law enforcement has no authority to enforce state or local laws, nor should they have. Do you truly want a national police force, run by some bureaucrat in DC, responsible for enforcing our state and local laws and then doing the very same in every single state? Can you imagine how truly monstrous, intrusive, pervasive, costly, and non-responsive such an organization would be?
From all I have read, these Long Beach officers did not behave “stupidly.” They performed in full accordance with their training, their policies, their procedures, and the law. That’s why I do not believe these officers are to any degree at fault here. Because at the end of the day Zerby’s death was a tragic mistake and nothing more. We, cops included, are flawed and failing human beings. We are neither omniscient nor omnipresent. It is just not possible to legislate or to train every flaw and every failing out of us. Would that we could.
The standard of our civil law enforcement training in Long Beach is among the highest in the world. But that standard will never be high enough to make our officers flawless. Much though some seem to feel that they should be.
Greet CONSTANTLY claims he wants civil discourse and also claims he treats people with respect. That’s why Greet responds to a new commentor, “Steve, You appear to be woefully ignorant……”
Reminds me of the infamous Saturday Night Live line “Jane, you ignorant slut.”
Ruehle misperceives my meaning. This is not necessarily uncommon for Ruehle, nor even particularly unexpected. But unfortunate nonetheless.
Mr. Greet,
To me, context is everything. The context as noted in the report, of Zerby sitting on a step, with the police left to fill in the blanks with conjecture, seems unprofessional to me. Simply announcing he was surrounded by the police and to drop his “weapon,” and observing Zerby’s following response, would likely have given them enough information to proceed, particularly since a sniper had the man’s head in his sights, presumably at all times.
You can’t just look at some guy sitting down with an unidentified object in his hand, and blow him away because you think it might be too dangerous to deal with.
Hell, the LAPD shouted at the man walking down the middle of Vine to drop his gun, before they finally shot him, when he didn’t comply. This is when they KNEW what they were dealing with!
Some guy sitting on his butt, across the street from a bar, in a perimeter generally secured by police snipers, should be accorded the same professionalism by peace officers, it seems to me. Also seems to me if they knew they had a sniper on the scene, they should err on the side of the sniper taking the shot, since he’s looking thru a scope. Not a frickin’ free-for-all from people in bushes and balconies. Seems like that’s just asking for the outcome that occurred. It’s a little to “Dodge City” for me. Not professional.
Again, I don’t think the officers are bad people. I think they made a mistake. A BIG mistake. And should own up to it, and deal with the consequences.
The whole thing is a huge tragedy, but justice isn’t necessarily about mitigating tragedies. Sure it’s making it worse for officers who must feel horrible about what they did, but that shouldn’t influence final judgement on the matter by trying to skew reality in the officers favor.
There’s nobody more pro-police than me, or ready to judge in their favor. In this case, it just looks to me like they’re circling the wagons to protect the city from civil awards, by leaving nobody legally accountable for a real tragedy.
And again, I’d hate to live with the idea that a neighbor who doesn’t know me, could call the police on me, and I could get my head blown off for wandering around in my front yard with a big keyring full of keys in my hand, and not even know what hit me! Nobody in their right mind could be an advocate of that potential scenario.
Because it’s wrong for that scenario to be a possibility under current LBPD professional standards. If it is, it needs to be changed. I like my life.
Hi Steve. I have read and understood your comments. You have stated your position clearly, concisely, reasonably, and respectfully and I greatly appreciate that I can still find people here at GLB who are still capable of your mature and courteous manner of dialog and discussion.
We disagree on several key points:
We must not make any presumptions about what the officer with the rifle (he was *not* a sniper, this is simply inflammatory and inaccurate language) was able to see or not see through his scope. Are you aware of what the magnification of the scope he was using was? Are you aware of whether or not there were any visual impediments between that officer and Zerby? An officer with a scoped rifle can no more always see everything about a suspect than anyone else can without one.
I do not believe the officers in question just looked at some guy sitting down with an unidentified object in his hand, and blew him away because they thought he might be too dangerous to deal with. They had advanced information that the object was a firearm. They observed him holding and manipulating an object that, as best as they could tell, looked and sounded to them like a firearm. They saw him pointing the object with a two handed grip as is typical of a person holding a firearm. They perceived that the threat he posed was real and they took action -in accordance with their training- to stop that threat.
Hundreds of officers in the US are murdered each year by suspects with firearms, some in situations quite similar to this one. No officer can afford to hesitate for even half a second if he or she reasonably perceives a deadly threat of this type. The officers who fired had no more of an idea of what the officer with the rifle could actually see, or how well, than you or I do. They could not afford to assume that someone else might have had a better shot. Again, they apparently perceived the threat and took action in accordance with their training to stop that threat.
I have said all along that this was a terrible tragedy and a horrible mistake. But I believe it was an *honest* mistake and one that anyone in the same situation, and with the same training and experience, might easily make.
Thanks again for the civil discourse!