TO STOP POLICE VIOLENCE, THE PERPETRATORS MUST BE PUNISHED
By CalWatchdog.com
BY MARK CABANISS
[Editor’s note: Mr. Cabaniss is an attorney from Kelseyville, CA. He has worked as both a public defender and a prosecutor.]
Let us be clear: the death of Kelly Thomas was not a “tragedy’ during a “confrontation” or an “altercation”; it was a gang killing, in which six men beat to death a small, mentally ill man who was completely unconscious as the final death blows fell. The six killers were police. And now, although Kelly Thomas is dead at 37, perhaps the growing public outrage over his killing can be the impetus for some good—for some much-needed reforms.
First, to stop police violence, it must be punished. That means that the actual perpetrators have to be punished, as opposed to the city buying off the survivors with piles of taxpayer money. And punishment means criminal prosecution, not administrative reprimand or paid leave. And criminal prosecution means an honest attempt to convict the killers of whatever crime, if any, fits the facts.
Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackaukus has said that he has seen no evidence of intent to kill. So what? As the DA well knows, a killing need not be intentional to be murder, or even first-degree murder. According to witnesses, Kelly Thomas was beaten to the point of disfigurement, and tased repeatedly. If either of these is true, his death would be prosecutable as felony murder, i.e., a death occurring during the crime of mayhem, under Penal Code Section 203 or a death occurring during the crime of torture, under Penal Code Section 206.
Nor should the prosecution stop with the killers. Someone in the police department put forth the ridiculous lie that two of the police had suffered broken bones in the “confrontation.” Attempting to help criminals evade detection by lying for them makes one an accessory after the fact. If any of the Fullerton six are convicted, then the liar(s) in the department should also be prosecuted.
Furthermore, we probably shouldn’t even ask the DA to investigate and prosecute the police. They work together every day as partners. The conflict-of-interest is just too great. One solution would be to form a special unit in the Attorney General’s office to investigate and prosecute cases of extreme police misconduct.
Another reform to honor Kelly Thomas would be to make it illegal to prevent anyone from filming uniformed police arresting people. Nationwide, police have attempted to arrest and intimidate citizens with cameras. But it is cameras and only cameras that police the police. Keep them running.
Finally, leaked reports claim that the killers bragged about what they had done to Kelly Thomas. If true, this is very disturbing. Who would brag about that? Inexplicably, the 99 percent of good, moral police suffer the presence of a few sadists. And the blue wall of silence arises whenever the police kill a suspect, no matter the circumstances.
Why? The police wouldn’t protect a cop who murdered his wife. There would be no silence if the dead suspect was an 8-year-old shoplifter. But because the suspect was a grown man it is somehow open season to beat him beyond all humanity. This raises questions of whether there is pathological aggression in search of an outlet.
Will we find out anything else about the aggressors here in the world following the 2006 Copley decision, which shut the door on the public’s right to learn about disciplinary procedures against bad-behaving police officers? It’s doubtful, for instance, that we would learn whether any of these officers were on drugs, specifically aggression-enhancing steroids.
CONTINUE READING AT CALWATCHDOG.ORG
Nationwide, police have resisted drug testing for steroids as “too expensive,” as if buying off the survivors of police violence with taxpayers’ money were not expensive. Many people drug test for their jobs. Maybe police should, too, if steroids turn up in this awful case.
Mark Cabaniss is an attorney from Kelseyville. He has worked as a prosecutor and public defender
















131 Comments
Isn’t it wonderful when the public becomes informed about what is happening in their community and speaks out about injustice and corruption.
July 27 ABC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmeCQpw7__w
August 20 Today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bxWee9_6jY
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day – Conflicts of Interest
“The truth is that our finest moments are most likely to occur when we are feeling deeply uncomfortable, unhappy, or unfulfilled. For it is only in such moments, propelled by our discomfort, that we are likely to step out of our ruts and start searching for different ways or truer answers.” — M. Scott Peck
“Action has meaning only in relationship and without understanding relationship; action on any level will only breed conflict. The understanding of relationship is infinitely more important than the search for any plan of action.” — Jiddu Krishnamurti
“Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress.” — Mohandas K. Gandhi
“Change means movement. Movement means friction. Only in the frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract world can movement or change occur without that abrasive friction of conflict.” — Saul Alinsky
“There are three ways of dealing with difference: domination, compromise, and integration. By domination only one side gets what it wants; by compromise neither side gets what it wants; by integration we find a way by which both sides may get what they wish.” — Mary Parker Follett
“You can’t shake hands with a clenched fist.” — Indira Gandhi
“Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of creative alternatives for responding to conflict — alternatives to passive or aggressive responses, alternatives to violence.” — Dorothy Thompson
(Source: brainyquotes.com)
what? greet, the chief apologist for murdering police scum, hasnt posted yet? are we going to be allowed to form our own opinions without hearing the police propaganda? its about time he shut the f up.
“Inexplicably, the 99 percent of good, moral police suffer the presence of a few sadists. And the blue wall of silence arises whenever the police kill a suspect, no matter the circumstances.”
why should we assume 99% are good moral officers when they hide crimes committed by their fellow cops?
I think all suspected criminal acts should be fully and objectively investigated. If the public loses confidence that the D.A cannot do so in this case, then I very much like the suggestion of the State A.G. doing so. If probable cause exists that a crime has been committed, then I think the appropriate criminal charge(s) should be filed and then vigorously prosecuted. Upon conviction, punishment should be swift, sure, and severe.
In addition to any criminal penalties, the perpetrators should be sued civilly where appropriate and, if a preponderence of the evidence indicates civil liability, particularly in the case of sworn law enforcement officers, the civil penalties should likewise be swift, sure, and severe.
There is no excuse whatsoever for knowing, intentional, or malicious police misconduct.
Tragic, Horrendos, but not unusual.
These police are an embarassment to good cops every where.
They will be punished.
Little will change, violence is as american as Twinkies……
There is not one of you who is willing to wait to see all of the evidence. You have tried and condemned 6 men who have put their lives on the line for you every single day of your career. Long Beach’s population seems to be vigilantes. No one has said that the cops did the right thing, but what you are doing in criminalizing them is every bit as bad as any other hate crime. My dad was a policeman, and there were bad apples even 70 years ago when he was on duty – but there were many more of them (my dad foremost) who had a desire to serve the public and protect them from criminal elements, and they are the ones who are being overlooked in your efforts to rush to judgement. Killing this man was not the right thing to do, but even his dad has said that he was violent without his medication, and that he lived on the streets when he refused to take them… so he was a violent schizophrenic who was breaking car windows, who had run-ins with the police in the past, and whose family couldn’t control him when he was violent, but none of you are mentioning those facts. Why? You are acting with a herd mentality, and some people who are actually waiting to hear all of the facts and see all of the videos before making a judgement are tired of your condemnation.
Sorry… *their career*.
In Fullerton a police union official is the city’s official spokesman. A leader of the very same union that hired a lawyer to defend the six cops that beat Kelly Thomas to death.
The very same union that sends out campaign propaganda supporting elected official that do their bidding. The very same union that asks for non-sustainable lush pensions even though cities are going broke.
All right: I travel to the EU once a year. On ten flights, nothing in my bags was touched, but on one flight my bag was ransacked. Does this mean that I should blame the entire TSA (although I do not think they are doing a good job) for what one person did, or should I hold that one person accountable? Obviously, it was not a TSA conspiracy, and this isn’t a conspiracy either. Just let it take the course it needs to take in the court, and if you are not happy with the outcome, then protest it. So, who elected the person who is the spokesperson for the city of Fullerton, and why are you trying so hard to connect dots to make your own conspiracy theory?
Cover-up not conspiracy. No-one elects a city spokesman. The city manager hires, Council/Mayor direct city Manager. A Notice of Intent to Recall has been filed with the city of Fullerton, for elected officials Dick Jones, Don Bankhead and Pat McKinley.
cov·er-up
noun
cover-ups, plural
An attempt to prevent people’s discovering the truth about a serious mistake or crime
con·spir·a·cy (kn-spîr-s)
n. pl. con·spir·a·cies
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
Odd; I thought this discussion was about police in Long Beach. You’ve got cover-ups and conspiracies enough to go around entire cities, evidently! Maybe if you all could stick to the subject at hand, more people would pay attention to you. As it is now, you are acting as the judge and jury for not only the Long Beach police but the Fullerton police as well, without giving them the same due process which anyone else would get – and when the discussion gets a little too factual for you, it turns into a discussion about someone else, or segues into name calling. Silly.
Remember 2-years ago after the Long Beach Police shot the guy 5-times in front of Legends Bar, and multiple police spokepeople claimed it was necessary because the the bad guy attacked the police officers who were afraid for for their lives?
So why then, was the bad guy only charged with resisting arrest? How come he wasn’t charged with assaulting a police officer or worse yet, attempted murder on a police officer?
Does resisting arrest warrant being shot 5-times? Moreover, now that we know the guy was never charged with those offenses, what ever happened to those cop spokespeople who attempted to mislead the public by providing stories that were not proven out in a court of law. Were those cops disciplined for their lies?
LC, why should people reserve their comments until we all “wait to see all of the evidence,” because we the public will NEVER have the opportunity to see all of the evidence.
The Long Beach Police are still not releasing the results of the investigation of Ernest Rodriguez who was shot 5-times in front of Legends in Belmont Shore over 2-years ago. More than that, the Long Beach Police department and City Hall requested and received a court order from Judge Arthur Nakazato ordering lawyers for the guy shot to not release any of the information at the request of the City of Long Beach. The April 6, 2010 order (below link) claims to be protecting the privacy interests of Officer Steinhauser and other officers involved who did the shooting.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/cacdce/8:2010cv00271/466721/
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/cacdce/8:2010cv00271/466721/17/
Furthermore, City Hall and the Long Beach Police Department have filed a law suit blocking the names of officers involved in shootings from ever being revealed to the public, despite the order of Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Patrick T. Madden. So how is the public to know whether there are trigger happy police officers iinvolved in multiple shootings?
Waiting for the results of the investigation before commenting is EXACTLY what the police want everyone to do. That means there will be no comments because the results will NEVER be released.
LC, here’s the links to the Long Beach Police Department and City Hall’s law suit blocking the release of names of officers who have shot and/or killed people.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:E85FqL3–74J:articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/21/local/la-me-police-names-20110121+la+times+LBPD+withhold+names&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/11/opinion/la-oe-newton-police-secrecy-20110411
ahh, yes, the old “just a few bad apples giving the good cops a bad name” comedy routine.
so why then haven’t the good cops stepped up and arrested their bad fellow coppers? why aren’t we seeing the “good” cops doing TV, writing columns, and eagerly testifying against those “bad” cops, so as to clear the good names of the police?
here’s a hint: if they won’t do these things – and believe me, they won’t – they ain’t “good” cops. ergo, they’re pretty much all bad. as Mr. Cabiness writes. they’re just another gang – although all the other gangs don’t hide behind badges and their D.A. friends.
There’s one question that’s been bugging me ever since this happened. Kelly Thomas’ father has expended an enormous amount of energy ever since his son died. He knew his son was a homeless, mentally ill person, susceptible to the vagaries of the streets, up to and including what eventually went down. Despite what Cabaniss wants to allow, his death was tragic. I haven’t followed this 24/7 so I don’t know if this has been covered, so my question is this- where was all this energy shown by Thomas’ father BEFORE his son died, trying to get him off the streets?
Ron Thomas and his mom and step mom have been at most public meetings and protests. They care greatly about Kelly Thomas, even after he is gone. Thomas has been in an out of schizophrenia treatment for years.
LC, I’m sure good ole dad knew of plenty of police misconduct and probably told great stories about fuoking with people.
Every cop I know tells these stories, shit is pulled everyday behind the’ blue wall of silence. Your dad is probably as guilty as the rest, no better no worst.
Concerning Rodriguez (2nd Street shooting from 2009):
Mr. Ruehle implies that Rodriguez was only charged with resisting arrest.
This implication is false.
Rodriguez was convicted of “one non-strike, felony count of resisting an executive officer” after he plead no contest to that charge. No doubt the District Attorney agreed to drop the other charges that had been filed so as to secure the plea and conviction on the resisting charge.
Further, Mr. Ruehle characterizes Rodriguez’ conviction as “only…resisting arrest.”
This characterization is misleading.
Rodriguez pled no-contest to, and was subsequently convicted of, “one non-strike, felony count of resisting an executive officer.” It is my understanding that Rodriguez pled to PC 148(b), which describes “(e)very person who, during the commission of any offense described in subdivision (a), removes or takes any weapon, other than a firearm, from the person of, or immediate presence of, a public officer or peace officer…”
In pleading no-contest, Rodriguez *conceded* the charge that was alleged (taking or removing Steinhauser’s baton) choosing to not offer a defense.
Concerning the court order issued Federal Magistrate Nakazato (issued March 2011, not April 2010):
Mr. Ruehle claims that “the Long Beach Police Department and City Hall requested and received a court order from Judge Arthur Nakazato ordering lawyers for the guy shot to not release any of the information at the request of the City of Long Beach.”
This claim is false.
This was a “stipulated protective order.” This means that this restriction was based upon an agreement reached between Rodriguez’ attorneys and those for Steinhauser and the City. Finding fault with this restriction is to also find fault with Rodriguez’ own attorneys, who agreed to (stipulated) the restriction in the first place. The very first line of this order makes this perfectly clear: “Based upon the Stipulation by and between the parties…”
Mr. Ruehle really should make better efforts to understand the legal documents he finds and then links for others to review.
Greet Gronic Koan of the Day (Koans are a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment)
This implication is false.
This characterization is misleading.
This claim is false.
_______________________________________________________
Definition of IMPLICATION
1
a : the act of implicating (see implicate): the state of being implicated b : close connection; especially : an incriminating involvement
2
a : the act of implying : the state of being implied b (1) : a logical relation between two propositions that fails to hold only if the first is true and the second is false
____________________________________________
Definition of CHARACTERIZE
transitive verb
1
: to describe the character or quality of
———————————————————————————-
Definition of CLAIM
1
: a demand for something due or believed to be due
2
a : a right to something; specifically : a title to a debt, privilege, or other thing in the possession of another b : an assertion open to challenge
3
: something that is claimed; especially : a tract of land staked out
I encourage people to not fall for Long Beach Police Officer John B. Greet’s constant attempts to turn the discussion away from the topic of police misconduct. Greet would much rather people argue about word parsing than the real issue.
janis’ unfortunate rhetorical conduct on these boards serves no constructive or productive purpose and rarely, if ever, serves to address the actual merits of the arguments of those she happens to disagree with.
Mr. Ruehle makes a habit of posting false, fraudulent and otherwise misleading information about topics related to city government generally, and LBPD specifically. Whenever someone draws attention to his sometimes intellectually dishonest methods, he accuses them of parsing words and attempting to deflect from the topic.
Mr. Ruehle characterized my comments here as “…constant attempts to turn the discussion away from the topic of police misconduct.”
His characterization of my conduct is also false. The very first comment I offered on this thread will *prove* that Mr. Ruehle’s characterization is false. If Mr. Ruehle responds in character, however, he will neither acknowledge that this characterization was false, nor seek to correct the record. Instead he is more likely to ignore the clear proof of his falsehood, and simply move on to other false, fraudulent, and misleading comments.
Greet is unfortunate……ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…..
Footnote: zzzz (or z-z-z-z) is sound of snoring, from at least 1918. (Sometimes “a tiny saw cutting through a log” [1948] would be used, and both the snore and saw would make the same z-z-z-z sound.) Over time, this became associated with sleep in general, but most comic reference books (e.g. 2006′s KA-BOOM! A Dictionary of Comic Book Words, Symbols & Onomatopoeia, 2008′s Comic books: how the industry works) still mainly associate it with snoring. Dialect notes, Volume 5
By American Dialect Society
Greet “janis’ unfortunate rhetorical conduct on these boards serves no constructive or productive purpose and rarely, if ever, serves to address the actual merits of the arguments of those she happens to disagree with.”
…no constructive or productive purpose…
“Quoting yourself is like sniffing your own shit. You might enjoy it but it makes others gag.” seriousstan
I don’t condone the Fullerton cops’ actions, but I can’t help but wonder how many, if any, of the Fullerton protestors previously harbored any concern, sympathy or care for the mentally ill homeless on their streets.
Yes. Advocates are speaking out about how the mentally ill homeless are treated by the police. There is a report by a Fullerton business owner, they were told that in order to get rid of a problem homeless person they should call in an suspected burglary to get priority.
In 15 years the Orange County DA has not prosecuted one police officer for the use of excessive force. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgbLLtcAXpQ&feature=player_embedded
janis can claim whatever she likes about what an anonymous business owner claims about how some other anonymous person told the business owner to report a problem homeless person. Proving any of those claims might be somewhat more problematic, however.
California Peace officers who earn basic POST certificates receive more state-certified training in dealing with the emotionally disturbed and mentally ill than that offered in almost any other state. While I was still a member, LBPD delivered training in this area above and beyond what the state required.
Should we require more such training? I think so. Can we afford to do so in the context of limited training time and finite training budgets? I do not think so. Particularly since no matter how much training of this sort we deliver to the basic street-level police officer, it will never suffice to properly prepare them for every possible variation of every possible such encounter.
All we can do is deliver as much training as is practicable, and understand that police responses to such people, as with all people, are primarily reactive in nature. To a great degree, the person being contacted (and how he or she chooses to behave) largely dictates how the encounter develops. The officer is left to react, as best as he or she is able, to whatever choices the person makes or actions the person takes.
Knowing, willful, and/or malicious police misconduct is never acceptable and, once proven, should always be severely punished. Most often, however, the average police officer is just doing the best any human with the same level of training and experience *can* do.
I wonder whether, during the 15 years janis mentions, anyone in Orange County ever once appealed to the State Attorney General to step in and investigate allegations of police officer misconduct and, if so, what response they received.
“Rudeness is the weak man’s (or woman’s) imitation of strength.”
Eric Hoffer
Considering LA District Attorney Steve Cooley’s father was a cop, I wonder if any cops in LA County (Long Beach) have been prosecuted by the Los Angeles County DA for excessive force?
Considering all eight city officials that benefitted from excessive payments in the City of Bell, the ONLY one that was not prosecuted was Bell Police Chief Randy Adams. Furthermore, Cooley refused to turn over the investigation to the Attorney General to make sure the police chief would not be charged like the others.
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/09/steve_cooley_randy_adams_bell.php
Even the Bell police officers knew how crooked the Bell Police Chief Adams was and urged DA Cooley to prosecute him to no avail.
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2010/09/steve_cooley_randy_adams_bell.php
There certainly appears to be a conflict of interest whenever a District Attorney is investigating the misconduct of a police officers in their jurisdiction.
“Idiocy is the highest level of Greetness.”
Mike Ruehle
“No matter how many false, fraudulent, or otherwise misleading comments, Mr. Ruehle posts on a given topic, he will always have more of those to offer. No matter how many times someone asks him to prove some of his assertions, he will either ignore the request or attempt to deflect from it and offer insult, epithet, and rudeness instead. No matter how often his many comments are proven false, he will continue to offer still more falsehoods, as if no one could possibly have the wit to notice or the personal integrity to care.”
John B. Greet
Greet School of 17th-Century Continental Rationalism & the
Gronic Koan of the Day
“I think so.”
“I do not think so.”
———————————————————————————————-
(Koans are a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment)
Footnote: “Cogito ergo sum” Descartes
janis’ unfortunate rhetorical conduct on these boards serves no constructive or productive purpose and rarely, if ever, serves to address the actual merits of the arguments of those she happens to disagree with.
“Quoting yourself (AGAIN AND AGAIN) is like sniffing your own shit. You might enjoy it but it makes others gag.” seriousstan
She said, quoting herself again.
I was quoting the seriousstan dummy. Go sit in the corner with your gun and wear a pointy hat.
janis
August 23, 2011
“Quoting yourself is like sniffing your own shit. You might enjoy it but it makes others gag.” seriousstan
janis
August 23, 2011
“Quoting yourself (AGAIN AND AGAIN) is like sniffing your own shit. You might enjoy it but it makes others gag.” seriousstan
~~
In the first we see that janis quoted seriousstan. In the second, we see janis quoted herself, quoting seriousstan. Apparently it is ok for janis to quote herself, but not for others to do so. Apparently it is not ok for me to do so, but ok for Mr. Ruehle to do so, over and over again.
Apparently janis is incapable of discussing the merits of a person’s arguments or to attempt to counter them with arguments of her own. All she can do is offer insults and other snide comments.
Her rhetorical approach is neither constructive nor productive.
What a shame.
Greet School of 17th-Century Continental Rationalism & the
Gronic Koan of the Day (Part 1 & 2)
Part 1: I think therfore I am Descartes
“I think so.”
“I do not think so.”
Part 2: The wilderness of self and Godot.
“In the first we see that janis quoted seriousstan. In the second, we see janis quoted herself, quoting seriousstan.”
———————————————————————————————-
(Koans are a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment)
Footnote 1: “Cogito ergo sum” Descartes
Footnote 2: “”Let us not waste our time in idle discourse! Let us do something, while we have the chance! It is not every day that we are needed. Not indeed that we personally are needed. Others would meet the case equally well, if not better. To all mankind they were addressed, those cries for help still ringing in our ears! But at this place, at this moment of time, all mankind is us, whether we like it or not. Let us make the most of it, before it is too late! Let us represent worthily for once the foul brood to which a cruel fate consigned us! What do you say? It is true that when with folded arms we weigh the pros and cons we are no less a credit to our species. The tiger bounds to the help of his congeners without the least reflection, or else he slinks away into the depths of the thickets. But that is not the question. What are we doing here, that is the question. And we are blessed in this, that we happen to know the answer. Yes, in this immense confusion one thing alone is clear. We are waiting for Godot to come—” Beckett
What you often do here, janis, is waste our time with idle discourse. This is unfortunate, because you are quite intelligent and during the rare occasions when you have been able to set aside your childish offerings of insult, I have actually been able to learn a thing or two from you.
If only your sense of social responsibility seemed even half so developed as did Vladimir’s.
I’ll echo DWR’s comments as they are similar to what I asked earlier-DWR said-
“I don’t condone the Fullerton cops’ actions, but I can’t help but wonder how many, if any, of the Fullerton protestors previously harbored any concern, sympathy or care for the mentally ill homeless on their streets”
Meaning, where was all this fervor before Thomas’ death? Why did it take that to see such concern? Was it there and we just haven’t noticed it?
Precisely right, RW Crum.
The potential (and despicable) abuse of police authority, here, notwithstanding, police officers are often expected to deal effectively -within just a few violent moments- with the mental and emotional challenges of others which have been years and sometimes decades in the making.
I can tell you from first hand experience that no amount of law enforcement training can adequately prepare a basic street-level police officer for a sudden violent encounter with a mentally ill or emotionally disturbed person who will not be talked down and is intent upon actively physically resisting all attempts to control and restrain him or her.
This is not, by any means, an attempt to condone police abuse or misconduct. It is merely an attempt to try to get some to extend the same sort of empathy toward our professional police officers, as they do toward some of the people which we sometimes ask those officers to contact and effectively manage.
The National Alliance on Mentally Illness has issued this statement. http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=press_room&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=125166
…..NAMI encourages the City of Fullerton and its Police Department to undertake a comprehensive review of the training of its officers, looking to the most effective models, to govern interaction with individuals exhibiting symptoms of serious mental illness. The review should include direct participation by individuals and families who live with mental illness and medical experts.
According to Greet:
“This is not, by any means, an attempt to condone police abuse or misconduct. It is MERELY an attempt to try to get some to extend the SAME sort of empathy toward our professional police officers, AS THEY DO toward some of the people which we sometimes ask those officers to contact and effectively manage.
Tell that to the families of the Zerby’s, Stephen’s and the Rodriguez’s, who saw their family member shot or killed by Long Beach Police Officers and who witnessed the police misconduct protected by our elected officials who will, or have already, agreed to pay the families large sums of taxpayers money in settlement to cover up the misconduct.
Recent comments question why the family members did not take more responsibility for the action of their mentally ill brother. Really. Really. When the hell is the Police Department going to take responsibility for THEIR misconduct. That’s right, blame the victim rather than the perpetrator of the violence. Next, you will tell everyone that women DESERVE to be raped if they wear revealing clothing.
janis highlights a very excellent support, education, advocacy, and research organization called the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI).
http://www.nami.org/
As a former member, I can personally attest to the importance of NAMI’s work throughout the nation and I have immense respect for their comments concerning the tragic death of Kelly Thomas. In it’s statement, NAMI also said:
“No one really knows at this time—other than the police officers themselves—what went on during the horrible beating and use of tasers on Kelly Thomas.”
and
“It is important to review all the facts in any tragedy and try to learn from mistakes so that such a tragedy might not ever happen again.”
http://www.nami.org/Content/ContentGroups/Press_Room1/2011/August18/Kelly_Thomas_Tragedy_in_Fullerton,_California_Statement_by_National_Alliance_on_Mental_Illness.htm
Just as NAMI has done, I encourage people to remember that at this point none of us -who were not there- really knows all of the facts surrounding this tragedy. Because of this, it it is important to discover and review all of the facts so that we might do whatever may be possible to prevent something like this from happening again.
As is so often the case, Mr. Ruehle has misunderstood my comments and, rather than to ask me reasonable questions in a civil and courteous manner in an attempt to gain a better understanding, he has instead chosen to blatantly mischaracterize what I have said to suit his own uncivil and insulting purposes. Nothing of a productive or constructive nature is gained by such intellectually dishonest rhetorical tactics.
Kudos Mike
Oh by the way approx a month ago Ron Thomas was offered $900,000 by the Fullerton City Attorney to forget about what happened to his son and just go away.
According to one source, The City of Fullerton made no official settlement offer: “According to City Manager Joe Felz, “This was a tragic event for the Thomas family and our entire community. While I can’t comment on matters related to an ongoing investigation or potential litigation, any settlement offer can only be made with authorization of the City Council. The City Council has not authorized a settlement agreement in this case.” Councilmember Sharon Quirk-SIlva added, “If there is one, I haven’t seen it.”
http://fullertonstories.com/city-says-no-settlement-offered/
Who do you believe Ron Thomas a former OC Sheriff Deputy and use of force trainer or the City of Fullerton? Ron Thomas said that he was offered a settlement by a representative of the city and that he turned them down.
Here goes John B. Greet, again protecting his fellow police officers no matter how atrocious their misconduct or murder.
The below link takes you to a copy of the Settlement Offer presented by Fullerton City Attorney Bruce Praet to Ron Thomas to compensate his family for the murder of his son by the Police.
http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-common/mlib/616/08/616_1312413089.jpg
According to the same link Greet provided, the “Settlement” Offer given to Thomas shows how $900,000 would be paid to the family over the next 25 years. Each of Kelly Thomas’ siblings would get about $97,000, and Ron and Cathy Thomas would each get about $160,000. Other relatives of Kelly Thomas were also slated to get money. Also, the foundation Ron Thomas intends to set up in his son’s name to benefit the homeless community would get $125,000 – in annual payments of $5,000.
Thomas says Praet told him that he needed to make a decision by August 2 so the council could review it during closed session that day. If the council approved it, the offer would become official at that time.
I think a reasonable distinction can be drawn between an unofficial offer (more akin to an approach to assess Ron Thomas’ interest in a settlement) and an official settlement offer, which as my link clarifies, the Fullerton City council would have had to authorize.
Further, I rather doubt that any offer, informal or otherwise would have, as any portion of its purpose, an attempt to convince Ron Foster “to forget about what happened to his son and just go away.” This sort of hyperbole serves no constructive or productive purpose.
When Mr. Ruehle accuses me of “protecting (my) fellow police officers no matter how atrocious their misconduct or murder” he is repeating a blatant falsehood that I have already thoroughly and unequivocally disproven.
At some point folks really ought to consider how very common Mr. Ruehle’s false, fraudulent, and otherwise misleading comments have become on sites like this.
City Manager Joe Felz should know there is a big difference between a “settlement offer” and a “settlement agreement.” The “offer” was probably made contingent upon City Council approval, which is what Ron Thomas was told. Just because City Council didn’t approve the “offer” doesn’t mean it was not made.
This is a similar situation to Mayor Foster, who recently publicized his “agreement” with the police Union on a new contract. However, that “agreement” means nothing until City Council votes to approve the changes. That doesn’t mean Mayor Foster didn’t make an offer and reach agreement contingent upon City Council approval.
Greet unintentional Gronic of the Day-
Freudian Slip “Ron Foster” City of Fullerton tries to Fosterize Ron Thomas?
“Further, I rather doubt that any offer, informal or otherwise would have, as any portion of its purpose, an attempt to convince Ron Foster “to forget about what happened to his son and just go away.” This sort of hyperbole serves no constructive or productive purpose.”
Right about now NWA court is in full effect.
Judge Dre presiding in the case of NWA versus the police department.
Prosecuting attourneys are MC Ren Ice Cube and Eazy muthafuckin E.
Order order order. Ice Cube take the muthafuckin stand.
Do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothin but the truth so help your black ass?
Why don’t you tell everybody what the fuck you gotta say?
Fuck tha police
Comin straight from the underground
Young nigga got it bad cuz I’m brown
And not the other color so police think
They have the authority to kill a minority
Fuck that shit, cuz I ain’t tha one
For a punk muthafucka with a badge and a gun
To be beatin on, and throwin in jail
We could go toe to toe in the middle of a cell
Fuckin with me cuz I’m a teenager
With a little bit of gold and a pager
Searchin my car, lookin for the product
Thinkin every nigga is sellin narcotics
You’d rather see me in the pen
Then me and Lorenzo rollin in the Benzo
Beat tha police outta shape
And when I’m finished, bring the yellow tape
To tape off the scene of the slaughter
Still can’t swallow bread and water
I don’t know if they fags or what
Search a nigga down and grabbin his nuts
And on the other hand, without a gun they can’t get none
But don’t let it be a black and a white one
Cuz they slam ya down to the street top
Black police showin out for the white cop
Ice Cube will swarm
On any muthafucka in a blue uniform
Just cuz I’m from the CPT, punk police are afraid of me
A young nigga on a warpath
And when I’m finished, it’s gonna be a bloodbath
Of cops, dyin in LA
Yo Dre, I got somethin to say
Fuck the police (4X)
M. C. Ren, will you please give your testimony to the jury about this fucked up incident.>
Fuck tha police and Ren said it with authority
because the niggaz on the street is a majority.
A gang, is with whoever I’m stepping
and the motherfuckin’ weapon
is kept in a stash box, for the so-called law
wishin’ Ren was a nigga that they never saw
Lights start flashin behind me
But they’re scared of a nigga so they mace me to blind me
But that shit don’t work, I just laugh
Because it gives em a hint not to step in my path
To the police I’m sayin fuck you punk
Readin my rights and shit, it’s all junk
Pullin out a silly club, so you stand
With a fake assed badge and a gun in your hand
But take off the gun so you can see what’s up
And we’ll go at it punk, I’ma fuck you up
Make ya think I’m a kick your ass
But drop your gat, and Ren’s gonna blast
I’m sneaky as fuck when it comes to crime
But I’m a smoke em now, and not next time
Smoke any muthafucka that sweats me
Or any assho that threatens me
I’m a sniper with a hell of a scope
Takin out a cop or two, they can’t cope with me
The muthafuckin villian that’s mad
With potential to get bad as fuck
So I’m a turn it around
Put in my clip, yo, and this is the sound
Ya, somethin like that, but it all depends on the size of the gat
Takin out a police would make my day
But a nigga like Ren don’t give a fuck to say
Fuck the police (4X)
Police, open now. We have a warrant for Eazy-E’s arrest.
Get down and put your hands up where I can see em.
Just shut the fuck up and get your muthafuckin ass on the floor.
[huh?]>
and tell the jury how you feel abou this bullshit.>
I’m tired of the muthafuckin jackin
Sweatin my gang while I’m chillin in the shackin
Shining tha light in my face, and for what
Maybe it’s because I kick so much butt
I kick ass, or maybe cuz I blast
On a stupid assed nigga when I’m playin with the trigga
Of any Uzi or an AK
Cuz the police always got somethin stupid to say
They put up my picture with silence
Cuz my identity by itself causes violence
The E with the criminal behavior
Yeah, I’m a gansta, but still I got flavor
Without a gun and a badge, what do ya got?
A sucka in a uniform waitin to get shot,
By me, or another nigga.
and with a gat it don’t matter if he’s smarter or bigger
[MC Ren: Sidle him, kid, he's from the old school, fool]
And as you all know, E’s here to rule
Whenever I’m rollin, keep lookin in the mirror
And there’s no cue, yo, so I can hear a
Dumb muthafucka with a gun
And if I’m rollin off the 8, he’ll be tha one
That I take out, and then get away
And while I’m drivin off laughin
This is what I’ll say
Fuck the police (4X)
The jury has found you guilty of bein a redneck,
whitebread, chickenshit muthafucka.
Wait, that’s a lie. That’s a goddamn lie.
I want justice! I want justice!
Fuck you, you black muthafucka!>
Fuck the police (3X)
I never said an offer was not made. I said no official offer was made, because as my link clarifies, the Fullerton Council would have had to first provide its approval to even officially EXTEND such an offer. According to my link, at least one Councilmember acknowledges that she had never even seen the offer, let alone cast a vote on whether or not to officially extend it to Mr. Thomas.
And, yes, janis, I misspoke when I said Ron Foster. I apologize, readily acknowledge the error, and willingly correct the record. The error was inadvertent. This is easily proven in that I did not misspeak and named Mr. Thomas correctly in the prior paragraph. In any case, thank you for pointing out my error.
(Take note, Mr. Ruehle, this is what people who are courteous and intellectually honest do when someone points out a false statement. They apologize, readily acknowledge the error and willingly correct the record. Then they thank the person for pointing our the error. It really isn’t a difficult thing to do. You should consider trying it sometime.)
Greet Intentional Gronic of the Day
Greet “I never said an offer was not made. I said no official offer was made,…”
http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-common/mlib/616/08/616_1312413089.jpg
————————————————–
of·fi·cial/əˈfiSHəl/
Official Adjective: of or relating to an office, position, or trust
Official Noun: A person holding public office or having official duties, esp. as a representative of an organization or government department.
Definition of OFFER
transitive verb
2 a : to present for acceptance or rejection : tender
Settlement Agreement: A contractual resolution to a disagreement between two parties without going to court.
janis do you have anything to offer that challenges the merits of my argument in this area? Nothing you have offered so far does so.
Yeh, the dictionary…..
An “official” in the Fullerton City Attorneys office presented an “offer” of money to Ron Thomas (to accept or reject) to compensate him for the loss of this son at the hand of the FPD. The attorney (an official representative of the city) made this official offer at the direction of the City Manager/Mayor and support of some of the city council members.
Your statement below is ridiculous.
Greet “I never said an offer was not made. I said no official offer was made,…”
Here is the official offer: http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-common/mlib/616/08/616_1312413089.jpg
Further….Fullerton may of violated the Brown Act when a few of the city officials agreed that this was enough blood money and directed the city attorney to present this offer. A closed Council meeting should of been held on this issue with the entire council present. The only “official” approval of this amount would of been in a settlement agreement, agendized and voted on by the council (in full public view) NOT as you stated an “official offer”.
I merely stated that Ron Thomas was offered a sum of money and this is true.
My comments above were not meant to blame anyone, Ruehle. My comments, actually in the form of a question, is this, copied and pasted from above-
There’s one question that’s been bugging me ever since this happened. Kelly Thomas’ father has expended an enormous amount of energy ever since his son died. He knew his son was a homeless, mentally ill person, susceptible to the vagaries of the streets, up to and including what eventually went down. Despite what Cabaniss wants to allow, his death was tragic. I haven’t followed this 24/7 so I don’t know if this has been covered, so my question is this- where was all this energy shown by Thomas’ father BEFORE his son died, trying to get him off the streets?
Nobody has directly answered it yet.
@ janis: And all I said was: “According to one source, The City of Fullerton made no official settlement offer.”
This appears to be true, because “According to City Manager Joe Felz…any settlement offer can only be made with authorization of the City Council. The City Council has not authorized a settlement agreement in this case.”
And because: “Councilmember Sharon Quirk-SIlva added, “If there is one, I haven’t seen it.”
We needn’t be at each other’s throats, here, janis. What you said was true. So also was what I said.
Crum, I’ve seen you post a very similar statement (not question) over and over again on numerous medias BLAMING the Zerby family for their son’s and brother’s death because they failed to do something about Douglas Zerby’s alcoholism before he was killed.
You choose to blame the blame the victim rather than the police department perpetrators of the violence. Next, you will tell everyone that women DESERVE to be raped if they wear revealing clothing.
Ruehle,
I have no pretense about being civil towards you like Greet does. Prove I ever said ANYTHING OF THE SORT ABOUT THE ZERBYS, YOU LYING, FUCKING SACK OF DOG SHIT. All I ever said about the Zerby situation was that the police officers there were put in an unfortunate situation because of the 911 man with a gun call from the neighbors. I’ve said over and over it was very tragic. If I’ve said what you allege over and over then you certainly must be able to provide a link to it. You won’t be able to produce one, you cowardly drunken pervert, because I never said it. YOU ARE A LIAR.
Also Ruehle, it’s very easy to find you for service of process. You might find here you’ve finally made one drunken allegation too many. Truth can be an absolute defense, but you have no truth here. Either provide a link, not some doctored copy and paste, and not something you’ve posted under my name this time.
See, the post with the swearing is faux outrage. Anyone can be or say anything hiding behind the keyboards of the internet. While it is true Ruehle is making this shit up, as Greet says, that’s what he does. After a while, who really gives a rip what people like Ruehle say. He hasn’t known the truth about much for some time now and so he just lies instead. My overall point remains- he will not post any link to what he alleges because it simply doesn’t exist.
@ RW Crum: I, too, will be interested to learn whether Mr. Ruehle is able to produce proof of this latest claim against you or, as has become all too typical for him, whether he will simply ignore your challenge or attempt to deflect from it and descend into offerings of insult and/or other false, fraudulent or otherwise misleading comments.
RW Crum- Here is an interview with Kelly’s dad Ron Thomas.
http://voiceofoc.org/oc_north/fullerton/article_125ff364-be63-11e0-b518-001cc4c002e0.html
Ron Thomas describes the history of his son’s mental illness, and states “unless he’s a danger to himself or others or committing a crime, he’s a free citizen over 21 years old.”
Here is the heartbreaking video of Kelly Thomas crying out for his dad, DAD DAD DAD as six Fullerton cops beat and Taser him repeatedly zzt zzt ztt ztt ztt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ljYNgLnpxM
RW Crum, my appologies. I am mistaken that you blamed the family. I misremembered your position in an argument with others about the Zerby murder by Long Beach Police being unavoidable. Others argued that Zerby’s family failed in preventing the murder by not becoming involved. Your position was it was unavoidable. I stand corrected.
Now you can go back to blaming Ron Thomas for his son’s death.
Your Quote, “where was all this energy shown by Thomas’ father BEFORE his son died, trying to get him off the streets?
Mr. Ruehle said: “You (RM Crum) choose to blame the…victim rather than the police department perpetrators of the violence. Next, you will tell everyone that women DESERVE to be raped if they wear revealing clothing.”
Mr. Ruehle’s use of the term “blame” in this context is significant. It can certainly be said that there is more than enough blame to go around in this incident. Assigning blame, however, in an imbalanced, disproportionate, and unjust manner is not productive. Further, assigning blame without suggesting realistic and constructive solutions is also not productive.
Where police actions and activities are concerned, Mr. Ruehle’s glass is always half empty. He habitually focusses upon and condemns the negative while rarely if ever acknowledging, let alone praising, the positive.
Perhaps this is understandable to some degree given Mr. Ruehle’s own documented history of criminal conduct.
Wherever police abuse is proven it should be punished both swiftly and severely. However, just as Mr. Ruehle’s own past criminal conduct had first to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt before he could be punished for it, so too must police misconduct be proven, in this case and all cases, through due process, before accused officers should be punished for that.
Whether it is beyond a reasonable doubt (criminal standard) or through a preponderance of the evidence (civil standard), or both, any alleged misconduct must be *proven* through due process.
Not just alleged, accused, blamed, inferred, or implied but *proven.*
Mr. Ruehle enjoyed a right to due process before his own criminal conviction. We should extend the very same consideration to any police officer who is accused of misconduct.
Mr. Rhuele said: “RW Crum, my appologies. I am mistaken that you blamed the family. I misremembered your position in an argument with others about the Zerby murder by Long Beach Police being unavoidable. Others argued that Zerby’s family failed in preventing the murder by not becoming involved. Your position was it was unavoidable. I stand corrected.”
I think we should all mark this date in our calendars. For Mr. Ruehle to concede to one of his own false statements is and stand corrected is almost unprecedented!
Of course, he proves unable to acknowledge his falsehood without also reiterating his unfounded and potentially libelous assertion that LBPD officers committed murder in Zerby. Still, acknowledging his falsehood concerning Mr. Crum is, I think, a very significant step toward his eventual recovery.
Kudos, Mr. Ruehle. There may be hope for you yet!
Long Beach Police Officer John Greet, please tell everyone about my “documented history of criminal conduct” that you have commented about and reported to newspapers for years.
rw crum needs to familiarize himself with the libel laws
1. “What is defamation?
Generally, defamation is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone’s reputation, and published “with fault,” meaning as a result of negligence or malice. State laws often define defamation in specific ways. Libel is a written defamation; slander is a spoken defamation.
would it be your assertion that your internet pseudonym’s reputation is being harmed “rw crum”?
obviously i dont need to go on.
as for you greet
“Celebrities and others with power in a community usually are considered public figures. Politicians and high-ranking government personnel are public officials, as are public employees who have substantial responsibility for or control over the conduct of governmental affairs. Some courts have found that public school teachers and police officers also are public officials.”
“Perhaps this is understandable to some degree given Mr. Ruehle’s own documented history of criminal conduct.”
perhaps you’d like to explain to all of us just how you became so familiar with this alleged history of criminal conduct?
http://www.rcfp.org/handbook/?pg=1-2
read up on it before you shoot your mouth off making threats.
Howardx,
There is a RW Crum who claims, “I’m a government lawyer. Sander, as if it matters.”
http://www.lbpost.com/news/greggory/11971
There is also a RW Crum who claims his moniker is his real name. However, the State Bar of California website does not list any RW Crum as a lawyer in California.
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/MemberSearch/QuickSearch?FreeText=crum&SoundsLike=false&x=91&y=8
The closest match is a Gregory Michael Crum who has been a lawyer for 18 months and now works for the Long Beach law firm of Perona Langer Beck Serbin & Mendoza in Long Beach.
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/272780
However, considering his communication style and vocabulary, I’m finding it hard to believe Crum is a lawyer like he claims. I guess I will have to wait to be served to find out.
Once again, Mr. Ruehle, identifies me as a Long Beach police officer. I am not. This identification on his part is false.
He knows his identification is false because he often also identifies me as a retired police officer. Which I am. He knows, or reasonably should know, that one cannot be concurrently a Long Beach police officer *and* a retired Long Beach police officer.
Everything I know about Mr. Ruehle’s documented history of criminal behavior I have learned on this site and others like it. He and others have discussed his documented history many times, sometimes going so far as to post links to stories about it from other news sources.
To the best of my knowledge, I have never disclosed anything about Mr. Ruehle’s documented criminal history to any newspaper. If he believes he can prove that I have done so, he is welcome to try.
As for, howardx, there are many, many civil court libel cases in which plaintiffs from all walks of life have prevailed. He really should make himself more aware of these cases before implying that it would not be possible for any public figure (including a law enforcement officer) to prevail in such a suit under the right circumstances.
This summary from a police officer-related defamation case from Georgia in 2003:
“A Deputy sheriff was properly awarded $225,000 in damages against a newspaper, its editor/publisher, and a columnist, based on articles which called him a “murderer” and accused him of beating a handcuffed arrestee to death with a flashlight. The Georgia appeals court found that statements were published with knowledge that they were false, or in reckless disregard of the truth. Lake Park Post, Inc. v. Farmer, #A03A0841, 590 S.E.2d 254 (Ga. App. 2003).
Word to the very unwise…
a newspaper is quite a different thing than someone posting their personal opinions on the comment section of a website, i assume that was all you could google up to try and prove me wrong. i again suggest you familiarize yourself with the 1st amendment, clearly nothing about your lifetime as a low level player in authoritarian organizations has educated you as to a citizens rights. other than violating them anyways.
i was, am and will continue to be of the opinion that you accessed mike’s record, in your capacity as an LBPD officer and leaked it to the press, i encourage you to sue me for libel so i can get access to the LBPD records they refuse to provide me. after all truth is the ultimate defense right? you have nothing to hide im sure…
howardx can hold whatever opinions he likes concerning any topic he likes. Whether or not his opinions have any basis in objectively verifiable fact remains quite another matter.
yeah thats what i thought.
All too familiar with the libel laws howard, being an attorney and all. And as I’ve told countless people, RW Crum is no alias. Crum is the name I was born with, so spare me the lectures.
Ruehle, to a degree, I actually appreciate the backhanded, half-assed apology. Any goodwill you might have engendered disappeared though with your lame attempt to twist my question into trying to blame Kelly Thomas’s father for his death. My question still stands- where was he with all this energy before?
No one wants to see their child die before they do, much less in the way Kelly Thomas died. No one knows how they would handle such a situation until it happens. However, having a child die doesn’t give one carte blanche to lose all control, incite a vigilante atmosphere and essentially stoop to the level of one’s perceived enemy however. Telling the press he’d like to see all the cops involved executed and later on tell the Fullerton mayor he’d like to take a baseball bat to him is the easiest way to begin to lose the automatic support and sympathy a parent would get if their child, even an adult child, was killed in the way Kelly died.
howard, there’s no point in being an ass here and accusing Greet of “leaking ” anything simply because he holds views contrary to yours. For years and years, Ruehle was and still more or less is a relatively known quantity in Belmont Shore and by extension Long Beach, for any number of reasons including but not limited to his being the head of the Belmont Shore Resident’s Association at one point, his ongoing and somewhat public feuds with Gary Delong, Gene Rotundo, LBPD, etc. Point is, he’s made plenty of enemies over the years, seemingly on purpose. His DUI, if it was leaked at all, could have come from any number of places.
@ RW Crum: Thanks for attempting to be a voice of reason here. I think people like howardx know very well that I had nothing to do with improperly or unlawfully leaking Mr. Ruehle’s documented history of criminal conduct. If they truly believed I did so, they must surely have some proof and, if they had such proof, they would surely be only too happy to present it.
I believe the only reason howardx, Ruehle, and a few others persist in that accusation is that, with it, they attempt to deflect from the actual merits of my arguments. You see, I have the abject audacity to disagree with the foolish things they sometimes say and to ask them for proof whenever they make various arguments and claims. They do not seem to like this very much.
Mr. Ruehle does, indeed, have a documented history of criminal conduct. This is a fact. He has publicly admitted it. At this point it really doesn’t matter how this information first came to light. If it can be proven that *any* current or former public official unlawfully or otherwise improperly leaked Mr. Ruehle’s confidential criminal record I think it was wrong and if it can be proven they should be properly punished for having done so.
The only time I have ever made an inquiry with LBPD concerning Mr. Ruehle was on *his* behalf and at *his* urging. As he so often does, he had made claims that some police reports he had made had never been filed. I called the records section on *his* behalf, asked if the crime reports he listed had been filed and when, and reported back to *him* that his reports had, indeed, been filed, and in a timely manner. Mr. Ruehle has long since forgotten this official inquiry I made on his behalf, alhough he certainly acknowledged it at the time.
The only reason I choose to mention Ruehle’s documented history of criminal conduct now is that he has made a habit of responding to many of my own comments by pointing out that I used to be with LBPD, inferring that this fact should somehow serve to undermine my credibility and, because of this, folks should discount what I have said.
Ruehle is free to make that inference, just as I am likewise free to remind folks that he has a documented history of criminal conduct and pose the reasonable question of whether *his* own past likewise serves to undermine *his* own credibility.
Mr. Ruehle and several of his…followers…here, and elsewhere, don’t seem to like that very much. It seems to make them very uncomfortable for some reason. Perhaps because it rings a little too true to them and it seems clear that most of them are very uncomfortable with things like truth or facts of proof.
Greet Conspiracy Theory Koan of the Day-THEM
(Koans are a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment)
“Perhaps because it rings a little too true to them and it seems clear that most of them are very uncomfortable with things like truth or facts of proof.”
if youre familiar with the libel laws as you claim, being an attorney and all why make hollow threats? we both know you’d get nowhere trying to claim you were libeled by mike.
“I believe the only reason howardx, Ruehle, and a few others persist in that accusation is that, with it, they attempt to deflect from the actual merits of my arguments.”
stupid, egotist comments like this are why i feel perfectly justified being an ass to greet. his “arguments”, such as they are, are generally weak and uninformed. when proven wrong, like he is above about the offer to thomas’ father he invariably lies about what he said or attempts to weasel out by parsing individual words “official offer” vs “offer” for instance. i have personally provided greet with links and quotes NUMEROUS times that have proven his “arguments” wrong which he just ignored so i find it amusing that he would lie and say none of us ever prove his “arguments” wrong. i have no personal problem with you rw crum but i wont be told how to conduct myself with a serial obfuscator like greet.
“The only reason I choose to mention Ruehle’s documented history of criminal conduct now is that he has made a habit of responding to many of my own comments by pointing out that I used to be with LBPD, inferring that this fact should somehow serve to undermine my credibility and, because of this, folks should discount what I have said.”
mike is exactly right, anything you say about lbpd or police matters in general should be taken with a grain of salt as you have proven yourself incapable of getting past your bias as a former officer.
janis’ unfortunate habit of ridicule serves no constructive or productive purpose.
howardx, please illustrate if you can, how my assertion concerning an official Fullerton settlement offer has been “proven wrong.”
Words mean things. Because of this I try to be very careful about the manner in which I employ them. Thus when you and others persist in taking me to task for words that I *have not* used and for things that I *have not* said, you are just not being intellectually honest.
If we cannot maintain some minimal level of of intellectual honesty, courtesy and respect between one another, we will never accomplish anything of a constructive or productive nature.
If all you and some others can produce are epithets, insults, and snide commentary, you will never be able to share the knowledge you *do* have in any meaningful way. When you conduct yourself in those ways, you lose far more than you can ever gain.
you are not capable of intellectual honesty greet. intellectual is not a word i would use in any sort of connection with you at all.
The witless wisdom of Greet “Words mean things.” and it continues…..Greet “Because of this I try to be very careful about the manner in which I employ them.”
New fun game!….I am going to point out every time Greet inserts a grammatical modifier; such as like almost, most, sometimes, not the only, seem, official, may very well, to the best of my knowledge and etc. Either you mean it or not, “almost” or “official” is not a Get Out of Logic Jail card.
Greet, You write like someone who has given one too many depositions.
“You might very well think that but I could not possibly comment”….Francis Urquhart, House of Cards
So, in other words, howardx, you cannot, in fact, illustrate how my assertion concerning an official Fullerton settlement offer has been “proven wrong.” I really didn’t think so, but I thought it would be courteous, respectful, and intellectually honest to at least afford you the opportunity to try.
janis continues her tired and counter-productive rhetorical habits in her apparent efforts to deflect from the merits of my arguments by attempting to deconstruct them grammatically and philosohically. What a shame.
Howardx,
There is a RW Crum who claims, “I’m a government lawyer. Sander, as if it matters.”
http://www.lbpost.com/news/greggory/11971
There is also a RW Crum who claims his moniker is his real name. However, the State Bar of California website does not list any RW Crum as a lawyer in California.
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/MemberSearch/QuickSearch?FreeText=crum&SoundsLike=false&x=91&y=8
The closest match is a Gregory Michael Crum who has been a lawyer for 18 months and now works for the Long Beach law firm of Perona Langer Beck Serbin & Mendoza in Long Beach.
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/272780
However, considering his communication style and vocabulary, I’m finding it hard to believe Crum is a lawyer like he claims. I guess I will have to wait to be served to find out.
Greet Conspiracy Theory Koan of the Day-Part 1 THEM & Part 2 THEY
(Koans are a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment)
“Perhaps because it rings a little too true to them and it seems clear that most of them are very uncomfortable with things like truth or facts of proof.”
“I believe the only reason howardx, Ruehle, and a few others persist in that accusation is that, with it, they attempt to deflect from the actual merits of my arguments.”
janis continues her tired and counter-productive rhetorical habits in her apparent efforts to deflect from the merits of my arguments by attempting to deconstruct them grammatically and philosohically. What a shame.
Yep quoting you is enough to deconstruct your argument. What has happened is that your have failed to convince.
An argument both in philosophy and logic is an attempt to persuade someone of something, by giving reasons or evidence for accepting a particular conclusion. You have failed.
FYI Typo meant “is that YOU have failed to convince.”
janis apparently believes that arguments fail whenever they fail to convince *her*. Such a subjective standard is simply not reasonable. I am not interested in persuading *her* or any other individual to my points of view, only to offer them for reasonable consideration.
I do my best to base my opinions upon information that can be objectively proven as factual. When I challenge another person’s arguments, I do my best to offer objectively verifiable facts to support my rebuttals.
As we have seen here, it is more than possible for two people with opposing points of view to be correct. It is clear that Fullerton made an informal settlement offer to Ron Thomas. I *never* said that Fullerton did not do so. All I said was that Fullerton never made a *formal* settlement offer, and statements by Fullerton’s City Manager and at least one City Councilmember seem to support my assertion.
janis didn’t seem to like that I chose to draw this distinction for some reason.
Whether janis is persuaded that what I said was accurate, really has nothing to do with anything. Reasonable people can agree to disagree. What matters more, I think, is the “manner” of their disagreement…how they conduct themselves toward one another in the face of their disagreements.
janis’ conduct in the face of courteous and reasonable disagreement is that of a petulent child who cannot seem to stand that someone would dare to have a point of view that differs from her own. For some reason she seems to see this circumstance as some sort of personal insult, when there is never anything personal about it, and then lashes out with rudeness and condescension in her own responses.
What a pity.
Greet you are the one using the word “argument” but then you say “I am not interested in persuading *her* or any other individual to my points of view, only to offer them for reasonable consideration.”
Either you intend to persuade (you’ve failed) or you are arguing with yourself.
Definition of ARGUMENT
1
obsolete : an outward sign : indication
2
a : a reason given in proof or rebuttal b : discourse intended to persuade
3
a : the act or process of arguing : argumentation b : a coherent series of statements leading from a premise to a conclusion c : quarrel, disagreement
4
: an abstract or summary especially of a literary work
5
: the subject matter especially of a literary work
6
a : one of the independent variables upon whose value that of a function depends b : a substantive (as the direct object of a transitive verb) that is required by a predicate in grammar
janis seems to believe that she and I are the only persons reading this site. Her comments are very often directed at me, personally, and in a most personally affronting manner. My comments, by contrast, are for the broader audience…the general readership. When I make an argument in rebuttal to one of hers, it is for the consideration of all who may be reading and considering our differing points of view.
I have long since accepted that I will never likely persuade people like janis, or Mr. Ruehle, or howardx, etc. of much of anything. So seldom do they seem interested in courteous and respectful discourse, debate and discussion based upon objectively verifiable facts.
It seems more important to them to be be rude and to seem right, than to be courteous and consider divergent points of view in a more objective and dispassionate and less personal manner.
So janis will continue with her approach, and I with mine, and reasonable people can decide for themselves who seems the most reasonable and whose opinions seem more in line with truth, as supported by objectively verifiable facts.
Greet Gronic Before: “I am not interested in persuading *her* or any other individual to my points of view, only to offer them for reasonable consideration.”
Greet Gronic After: “My comments, by contrast, are for the broader audience…the general readership. When I make an argument in rebuttal to one of hers, it is for the consideration of all who may be reading and considering our differing points of view.”
Key phrases : “or any other individual” and “are for the broader audience…the general readership.” Comments made within an hour of each other.
Ergo….If it is not for any other individual + but for an audience, then either you are arguing with yourself or a plant, animal, mineral, or maybe some type of alien being.
Hey Ruehle, I said Crum was the name I was born with. If you have all this time on your hands surely you can parse that.
I would like to believe that janis is truly capable of and intrerested in productive and constructive dialog and discourse that is based more upon courtesy and intellectual honesty and less upon rudeness and emotionalism.
If she truly is capable and interested, she will shed, once and for all, these juvenile rhetorical habits of hers, for they do nothing to promote and support her ideas, and everything to undermine and erode them.
“So seldom do they seem interested in courteous and respectful discourse, debate and discussion based upon objectively verifiable facts.”
BINGO!
not interested in discourse with liars.
Reading Greet’s logic is like watching him standing in a carnival hall of ripply mirrors. …. “comments are very often directed at me, personally, and in a most personally affronting manner.”
Before: Greet “Janis seems to believe that she and I are the only persons reading this site. Her comments are very often directed at me, personally, and in a most personally affronting manner. My comments, by contrast, are for the broader audience…the general readership.”
After: (Entire Post) “I would like to believe that janis is truly capable of and intrerested in productive and constructive dialog and discourse that is based more upon courtesy and intellectual honesty and less upon rudeness and emotionalism.
If she truly is capable and interested, she will shed, once and for all, these juvenile rhetorical habits of hers, for they do nothing to promote and support her ideas, and everything to undermine and erode them.”
howardx appears to be accusing my of lying. If so, he should either offer objectively verifiable proof of this, or acknowledge that he cannot and, in so doing, see that despicable label applied to himself.
i not only appear to be calling you a liar, i am IN FACT calling you a liar.
I like using the phrase windy hypocrite.
greet if you say “objectively verifiable proof” a few more times you’ll be the number one result when you google it. as it stands now youre about 10 results down.
Clearly, howardx has no proof for his accusation. Others can draw their own conclusions about his own character based upon this.
I agree with howardx that GREET IS A LIAR, and I have posted “objectively verifiable proof” of this FACT several time is the past.
I agree with Janis that GREET IS A WINDY HYPOCRITE who received his liar based training as a long time employee of the Long Beach Police Department.
Ah yes, and now we hear from yet another person who makes a habit of making allegations for which he does not offer proof. Perhaps Mr. Ruehle can fare better, here, than his friend howardx, who still has not offered any facts to support his own allegation that I am a liar.
You’re up, Mr. Ruehle. You are accusing me of being a liar. You should either offer objectively verifiable proof of this, or acknowledge that you cannot and, in so doing, see that despicable label applied to yourself.
Either way your response should prove quite informative.
Yawn.
Definition of LIAR
1 Someone who states an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2 Someone who create a false or misleading impression
This most definitely has gotten into some of the most juvenile, repetitive grade school playground tripe imaginable. Be proud.
Definition of LIAR
1 Someone who states an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2 Someone who create a false or misleading impression
3 John B. Greet.
Agreed, RW Crum.
However, I felt it important to demonstrate or, rather, have Ruehle, howardx and now also janis themselves demonstrate that they have no objectively verifiable proof with which to support the allegation that I am a liar.
They have each proven, unequivocally, that at the end of the day all that they have are their petty, juvenile, and utterly unfounded accusations.
They can each now own the despicable title they so easily try to apply to others.
May they enjoy it.
Greet, I never wrote that you were a “liar”. I merely provided the dictionary’s definition of the word. Take a look, so does that make YOU a liar?
As for providing verifiable proof, facts, “discussing the merits” of your arguments, providing “intellectual honesty” and other hypocritical standards you apply to commentators, in a real debate or intellectual discourse none of this is the responsibility of the reader.
It is YOUR responsibility to support your own arguments… not the reader or a commenter on the article.
Intelligent critical thought means that you are critical of your own thoughts and biases even more so than of other people’s views and ideas.
Your unfledged insistence that all ideas or situations or history can be objectively proved is ridiculous and only a person with one view (their own) would demand such a standard.
—————————————————————————————
ob·jec·tive
adj \əb-ˈjek-tiv, äb-\
Definition of OBJECTIVE
1
a : relating to or existing as an object of thought without consideration of independent existence —used chiefly in medieval philosophy b : of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind — compare subjective 3a c of a symptom of disease : perceptible to persons other than the affected individual — compare subjective 4c d : involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena
2
: relating to, characteristic of, or constituting the case of words that follow prepositions or transitive verbs
3
a : expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations b of a test : limited to choices of fixed alternatives and reducing subjective factors to a minimum
janis chose to chime in, here, in clear support of the unfounded allegations lodged by Ruehle and howardx. Just as she has done on many other previous occasions…never in opposition…always in support of Ruehle’s many false, fraudulent and otherwise misleading comments.
Ruehle has now definitively proven himself to be a liar, as has howardx, as has janis, who has now chosen to support both Ruehle and howardx in their unfounded allegations.
Like Ruehle and howardx, janis does not seem to like to be questioned, rebutted, or refuted. Like Ruehle and howardx, whenever this happens she generally descends almost immediately into disparaging, belittling and otherwise derogatory behaviors.
Like Ruehle and howardx, janis routinely detracts far more than she adds to these discussions.
Sadly.
Greet Koan of the Day: The paradox of liars.
“You are accusing me of being a liar. You should either offer objectively verifiable proof of this, or acknowledge that you cannot and, in so doing, see that despicable label applied to yourself.”
(Koans are a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment)
Paradox of liars: Janis has never said that Greet was a liar. But now Greet states that Janis has “proven” herself to be a “liar” by stating that Janis supported other people’s claims that Greet is a liar. Since none of this happened ….then by Greets own standards he applies the “despicable label” of LIAR onto himself.
There is no paradox here. janis is a liar.
On 7/29, janis stated: “Now the big “bloviator” Greet knows what will make me happier?”
This inference was a lie. I never indicated that I knew what would make janis happier. janis is therefore a liar.
On 8/3, janis stated: “But what appalls most of of us Greet is that according to your GRONIC logic, we must keep quiet to protect police who shot Zerby for some crime the cops thought he was committing.”
This inference was a lie. janis accused me of something I never said or implied and then chose to be “appalled” by her own fallacious construct. janis is therefore a liar.
On 8/17, janis stated: “You are just a big bully who no longer carries a badge but still hides a gun carried “high” (your statement).
This statement is a lie. I am not a big bully, I often still carry a badge and I never made the statement she claimed. janis is therefore a liar.
On 8/28, janis said “Greet, I never wrote that you were a “liar”.
I never said that she did. What I said was: “However, I felt it important to demonstrate or, rather, have Ruehle, howardx and now also janis themselves demonstrate that they have no objectively verifiable proof with which to support the allegation that I am a liar.” I never said that janis offered that allegation, only that she has no objectively verifiable proof with which to support the allegation. janis chose to chime in, in clear support of Ruehle’s and howardx’s allegation. If her intent was *not* to support Ruehle and howardx in their allegation, then let her state outright that she does not support it. Let her state, here and now, that she does not believe me to be a liar. I would not encourage anyone to hold their breath waiting for that.
For my part, I have offered three specific and objectively verifiable examples of why I think janis is a liar. There are others, but I think readers can get my point. My point being that neither Ruehle, nor howardx, nor janis, seem willing or able to do what I have done here…offer specific and objectively verifiable proof of their accusations, or their support of accusations, that I am a liar.
Greet claims it is a lie that he still carries a gun. However, the following is an exact quote from retired as a Long Beach Police Officer John B. Greet.
“I do sometimes still carry a gun”
You can find Greet’s quote at the Greater Long Beach article titled “WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR RECALLING AN LB CITY COUNCIL MEMBER?”
Now, who’s the liar?
Ruehle stated: “Greet claims it is a lie that he still carries a gun.”
This statement is a lie. I never said what he claims. Ruehle is therefore, once again, proven to be a liar.
I am beginning to think that Ruehle is pathological in this respect.
Greet Hypocritcal Koan of the day: LIAR’S CONSTRUCT OF LYING
“I find it interesting that you are so quick to allege that others are liars, when you make such a habit of posting false, fraudulent and otherwise misleading information yourself. Perhaps you should consider moving out of that glass house of yours before you start casting so many stones.”
(Koans are a paradoxical anecdote or riddle, used in Zen Buddhism to demonstrate the inadequacy of logical reasoning and to provoke enlightenment)
**********************************************************************************
THE LIAR’S CONSTRUCT”
What he actually said:
John B. Greet July 18, 2011
“Nothing like hiding behind one’s anonymity and insulting others. I do sometimes still carry a gun, High, and quite lawfully and entirely responsibly. I think more people should do so. Don’t you?”
Greets false claim that Janis lied:
John B. Greet August 29 2011
“On 8/17, janis stated: “You are just a big bully who no longer carries a badge but still hides a gun carried “high” (your statement).
This statement is a lie. I am not a big bully, I often still carry a badge and I never made the statement she claimed. janis is therefore a liar.”
—————————————————————————————————–
What he actually said:
July 29 2011 John B. Greet
janis: If you are unhappy with my comments, you are free to choose to not read or comment upon them. If my own free participation is in any way infringing upon yours, then i would suggest you are ceding far too much of your own personal power to another. You might consider not doing so. You’ll probably be a lot happier in the long run.”
Greets false claim that Janis lied:
John B. Greet August 29 2011
“On 7/29, janis stated: “Now the big “bloviator” Greet knows what will make me happier?”
This inference was a lie. I never indicated that I knew what would make janis happier. janis is therefore a liar.”
————————————————————————————————–
What was said about Greets comments:
July 29 2011 LBCityGirl’s comment on Greet:
Wow. I cannot believe what I just read!
I am quite certain that I read John Greet say that people who have allegedly been victimized by the police do not have the right to talk to the press–he literally said these people should be gagged. Horrifying, what has our society become when the police believe they can do anything to civilians without any kind of accountability?”
Greets false claim that Janis lied:
August 29 2011 John B. Greet
On 8/3, janis stated: “But what appalls most of of us Greet is that according to your GRONIC logic, we must keep quiet to protect police who shot Zerby for some crime the cops thought he was committing.”
This inference was a lie. janis accused me of something I never said or implied and then chose to be “appalled” by her own fallacious construct. janis is therefore a liar.
Just keep squirming, janis, just as Ruehle is squirming.
You have both now been proven to be liars. Enjoy your new official titles. You should, you both have worked so hard for them after all.
Is this when you used to get out the rubber hose? I’ve been told that cops can legally lie to people to get them to confess crimes they did not commit. Read the above post quoting your OWN contradicting statements. Old habits are sure hard to break.
Greet ” Just keep squirming, janis, just as Ruehle is squirming.
You have both now been proven to be liars.”
I think I am done here.
Be well, janis, Ruehle, and howardx. Enjoy your new titles. Wear them well, for they are so very well deserved.
It’s scary to think that, until recently, John B. Greet was a long time Long Beach Cop. Even scarier, is the realization that Greet is still probably representative of the Long Beach Police force in their true arrogance and willingness to lie to suit their purpose.
Mike: Are you familiar with LBPD’s practice on retired officer’s carrying badges? How do we tell if a person is a real police officer? At this point I really want to know who I may be talking to.
Greet “I often still carry a badge”
California Senate Rejects Badge Bill
By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 18, 2008
SACRAMENTO — – Citing alleged abuse of badges issued by former Orange County Sheriff Michael S. Carona, the state Senate on Thursday rejected an effort to allow sheriffs and police chiefs to give badges to volunteers and retired law enforcement officers. http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?88719-California-Senate-Rejects-Badge-Bill
Is this really Officer Greet’s farewell to Greater Long Beach? Or just a farewell to this thread? Will we have to travel over to the PT or the Patch to get our daily Greet Koan?
We can alway get a glimpse of hiim on YouTube when we need a fix!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU8K_vopTls&feature=related
janis, I don’t know what LBPD’s practice is on retired officer’s carrying badges. But the bigger worry is guys like Greet who have a license to carry a concealed weapon.
Being an ex-cop, he can pretty much shoot anybody and his cop buddies will cover for him, since he always covers for their misconduct.
[...] an attorney who has worked as both a prosecutor and as a public defender. Mark has written several interesting pieces on the Kelly Thomas case over at [...]
Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant ordered the LA County Sheriff’s Department to release the names of deputies involved in fatal shootings and pay the LA Times $173,000 in attorney’s fees regarding litigation of the California Public Records Act lawsuit filed by The Times in 2009. The newspaper had sued after the Sheriff’s department refused to release the names of deputies involved in three fatal shootings of unarmed men.
Judge Chalfant first ordered the names released in March of last year, but his ruling was appealed by the deputies’ union. The litigation came to an end in June when the state Supreme Court declined to hear the union’s final appeal.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-deputy-names-20110831,0,4734663.story
Long Beach CITY COUNCIL authorized City Attorney Bob Shannon to spend TAXPAYER’S money to likewise block the LA Times most recent California Public Records Act request seeking the names of the Long Beach Police officers who killed Douglas Zerby for holding a hose nozzle. Upon refusal to release the names, TAXPAYER’S money was again authorized by CITY COUNCIL to appeal the Judge’s order requiring the names to be released.
At a time when our CITY COUNCIL is closing libraries, and laying off cops and firemen for lack of funding, they are also spending TAXPAYER’S MONEY to prevent disclosure of the names of the police officers who killed Doug Zerby. Now, on top of that, MY TAXPAYER’S MONEY will be spent to reimburse the LA Times for their legal fees.
Why aren’t we recalling this CITY COUNCIL for its irresponsible spending of TAXPAYER’S MONEY like the folks in Fullerton?