THE KELLY THOMAS CASE: INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER OR FELONY MURDER?
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. Listen to the Sept. 1 interview with him on Greater Long Beach Radio with Dave Wielenga]
Was Kelly Thomas murdered by the six Fullerton Police Deparment officers who beat and tasered him on July 5? Or would a charge of manslaughter be more appropriate? Under the law, the facts of each case are looked at to determine the appropriate charge. To analyze the legal options available to Tony Rackaukus, the Orange County District Attorney who will determine whatever charges may be filed against all or any of the Fullerton police officers who beat Kelly Thomas, it is necessary to hypothosize.
For that purpose, then, let us assume that the general consensus of media reports of the Kelly Thomas case are true: that six Fullerton Police Department officers began beating a man, continued beating him even after he was helpless, and ended up beating him to death.
If that were so—if this were basically a case of a gang beating that got out of control, and if the killing was unintentional and unplanned—then there would be two obvious ways to prosecute the killing: as involuntary manslaughter, or as felony murder. (Voluntary manslaughter isn’t really applicable to this fact situation, as it is meant to cover “heat of passion killings,” such as catching your spouse with another, etc.)
Looking at the facts as I have just stated them—that this was an unintentional killing coming from a gang beating that got out of control—it is my belief that this case would more properly be charged as a felony murder than as an involuntary manslaughter.
One definition of involuntary manslaughter, possibly applicable to these facts, is unintentionally killing someone while doing something lawful, but in an unlawful way—a situation legally described as, “without due caution and circumspection.”
Example: a barber gives a shave while simultaneously engaged in a telephone argument with his girlfriend. Not paying attention, he accidentally slits the customer’s throat, killing him. The barber could be convicted of involuntary manslaughter.
In the Kelly Thomas case, Rackaukus could say (and indeed, has said) that he has seen no evidence of intent to kill. Furthermore, Rackaukus might come to believe that the police were doing something lawful—arresting someone, but in an unlawful way—by using excessive force. The case could then be charged as involuntary manslaughter, the least serious form of homicide. If a few months later the police were to plead guilty to involuntary manslaughter for a light sentence, the whole mess might go away.
Maybe.
In the Kelly Thomas fact situation, the big problem with an involuntary manslaughter charge is that it would depend on what may well be an extremely flimsy verbal sleight of hand—asserting that the police were “doing something lawful,” in this case, “arresting someone.” But depending on how the facts turn out, this may be simply a naked assertion, a quick and bland misstatement of the facts, an approach that could be used in any murder case.
Example: You are a lawyer, and your client is charged with felony murder for accidentally shooting some guy while waving a gun around during a bank robbery. You argue (with a straight face; that’s why you get the big bucks) that your client is actually only guilty of involuntary manslaughter, since he was doing something lawful (withdrawing money from a bank), but in an unlawful way (while carelessly waving a gun around).
Do you think this argument will be a winner with the jury? The key to the analysis is whether the accused was doing something lawful in the first place.
Going back to the Kelly Thomas case: were the police actually doing something lawful—arresting someone? Assuming that the accounts of witnesses that have appeared in the media are true—that the police kept beating Kelly Thomas even after he lost consciousness—then at that time they were no longer making a lawful arrest, if they ever they had been.
Instead, a more accurate characterization of what they were doing was committing (at minimum) a gang battery, which battery got out of control, unintentionally killing Kelly Thomas.
An alternative definition of involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional killing arising out of misdemeanor criminal conduct.
Example: you are in a bar fight that’s taking place out in the parking lot. You hit the guy one time—with your fist, on the jaw, fair and square. Unluckily for you (and him), he falls and hits his head on the curb and bleeds to death before an ambulance can arrive.
This is a textbook case of involuntary manslaughter, because simple battery is a misdemeanor offense.
As should be obvious from the preceding example, it would be almost impossible to characterize what happened to Kelly Thomas as simple battery. Instead, the 6-on-1 police beating of an unconscious man, leading to severe bodily injuries, could be characterized as any of a number of different felonies: battery with serious bodily injury, mayhem, (basically maiming, cutting off, or rendering useless or permanently and severely impaired, a part of the body) or torture, as examples. Any of these felony charges would, coupled with Kelly Thomas’ subsequent death, serve as the predicate felony for a felony murder case.
What exactly is felony murder? Any death that arises out of the commission of certain dangerous felonies—and in California, all “inherently dangerous” felonies amount to felony murder. Again: a death is felony murder when the death arises from a felony. There does not have to be any intent to kill; it is irrelevant; luckily for the district attorney who perhaps needs political cover for prosecuting police officers, the death is still legally murder.
Example: You have kidnapped someone. You don’t want to hurt him—you merely want the ransom money. While you are driving down the road, the victim is bound and blindfolded in the back seat of your car. Somehow, he gets the door open and jumps out while the car is going 50 miles an hour. He dies.
You are guilty of felony murder because the death arose out of your felony—kidnapping, which is a dangerous crime. You are not merely guilty of murder; you are guilty of first-degree murder. Your lawyer isn’t even allowed to argue that there is no evidence of intent to kill; the judge won’t let him, because such evidence is irrelevant.
An actual illustration of felony murder: in a recent California case, People V. Wilkins, a burglar was driving away with stolen goods when some of them fell off the truck onto the roadway, causing the driver behind the burglar to swerve, wreck, and die. The burglar was convicted of first-degree felony murder because the death was caused by the commission of his felony—burglary.
In sum, an analysis of the Kelly Thomas case—again, assuming the details that have appeared in the media are true—suggests there are many different felonies that could be charged to obtain a felony murder conviction. Since there has been a death, and since that death obviously arose out of the police officers’ actions, the only question is whether the officers committed a felony against Kelly Thomas. Either a charge of mayhem or torture would make the case first-degree murder; a charge of mayhem would make it a capital case.
Again, the question of an intent to kill is legally irrelevant to the case—all six police officers could get the death penalty.
















84 Comments
Has the coroner officially ruled Thomas’ death to be a homicide?
It’s fairly obvious he didn’t die of natural causes.
Honestly, Mr. Greet, in your posing of that single question you have distilled to its essence the extent to which basic human empathy (and let’s add common sense) can be exchanged for loyalty (and let’s add financial dependence) on the officious (and let’s add artificial) machinery of the state—which, ultimately, exists to preserve its own existence … and succeeds to the extent it can find people willing to make that trade. When Kelly Thomas was being relentlessly beaten and tased by six men who made that trade, as Kelly Thomas screamed “Dad! Dad! Dad!”—a plea for help made heartwrenching (and perhaps illustrative of his mental illness) because it revealed his dying belief in a hope we know did not exist— Kelly Thomas was screaming for you.
What’s unnatural about a police officer doing knee-drops on peoples throats and tasing them multiple times while handcuffed?
Excellent contribution to the discussion. Thanks, Dave.
So has the Coroner offially ruled Thomas’ death to be a homicide?
Interesting interview today Mr. W.
Thanks for posing my question to Mr. Cabaniss, esq. concerning whether or not Thomas’ death has been officially ruled a homicide. I think it is unfortunate that, like some others here, he chose to not answer it.
What are you talking about Mr. Greet? I said repeatedly that the investigation was still ongoing. If you need me to put it in monosyllables, here goes: The death, has not, been ruled, on. There.
I think it is unfortunate that Greet can not do his OWN googling to answer his OWN questions. I suspect Greet’s mama still butters his toast and wipes is butt for him also.
Yes, Ruehle, that was a very un-informative, immature and extremely snide comment. Precisely the sort of response I have come to expect from you on just about any topic.
I wonder why no one, not even Mr. Cabaniss, esq, seems interested in offering a straight answer to such a simple and straightforward question?
Why, thank you, Mr. Cabaniss. It was, indeed, a very simple and straightforward question and I think if you review the recording of your interview, you will find that you most assuredly did *not* answer it, whether in multiple syllables or otherwise. It seemed reasonable to me to wonder why. Thank you for acknowledging that the coroner has not yet officially ruled Thomas’ death to be a homicide.
Here are a few other fairly straighforward questions for you if you would be interested in answering it:
In the fourth paragraph of this article, you wrote: “Looking at the facts as I have just stated them—that this was an unintentional killing coming from a gang beating that got out of control….”
Could you point out precisely where in the article up to that point you established that information as a “fact?”
Did you actually establish that information as a “fact” or was that really a hypothetical construct based upon what you believe is the general consensus of media reports of the Kelly Thomas case?
Thanks!
Hey, Greet! I thought you were done polluting these waters.
Alligator mouth . . . hummingbird ass.
More info regarding Fullerton PD’s public mis-information campaign about that night.
First it was released to the press that a police officer had broken bones while trying to restrain Kelly Thomas. This did not happen.
Now a public record request disproves the Fullerton PD’s statement that the officers were called out to investigate car burglaries when they approached Kelly Thomas. http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Police-Reports-Auto-Burglary-July-5.pdf
You mean the police LIED! I am shocked, I tell you! SHOCKED!
Fullerton……..Long Beach. A lot of similarities.
Headline: Autopsy Results in Fullerton Police Beating Face Potential Delays
Posted: Friday, August 5, 2011 4:32 pm | Updated: 3:59 pm, Sat Aug 6, 2011
.
Autopsy results for Kelly Thomas, who died a July 5 after being beaten by Fullerton police, may not be final for another four or five weeks while investigators wait for results of toxicology tests, a spokesman for the county coroner said Friday.
Even then, the cause of Thomas’ death would not be made public right away if law enforcement officials ask for a delay to complete their investigation, said Orange County sheriff’s spokesman Jim Amormino. The coroner’s office is part of the Sheriff’s Department.
“It’s going to be a while,” Amormino said, “a couple of months to several months. It could be quite a while.”
Thomas, a 37-year-old mentally ill drifter, was beaten into a coma July 5 during an altercation with six Fullerton police officers. He died July 10.
A preliminary autopsy completed July 12 was inconclusive about exactly what caused Thomas’ death, according to a story in the Orange County Register.
Toxicology tests to determine what, if any, drugs or alcohol were in Thomas’ system and may have contributed to his death can take up to two months to complete, said Amormino.
He said coroner’s officials also will be conferring with the District Attorney’s Office and the Fullerton Police Department, “all as part of the total investigation.”
Kelly Thomas’ father, Ron Thomas, said he wants the autopsy “to be extremely thorough, and I want it to be right. Obviously, I want those guys [who beat Kelly Thomas] to go away to prison, but it has to be done right.”
Thomas didn’t have an immediate comment on the possibility that release of the final report might be delayed should law enforcement requests more time for investigation.
In Los Angeles County, where the coroner’s office is a county department independent of both the sheriff and the district attorney, toxicology tests typically take six to eight weeks, said spokesman Craig Harvey.
He said law enforcement agencies can place a “security hold” on autopsy results to prevent their disclosure if they submit a written request to the coroner.
Those types of holds generally last up to 90 days, he said.
In the Thomas case, both the Orange County district attorney and the FBI are conducting investigations.
— TRACY WOOD
(Source: “Voice of OC — Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency – voiceofoc.org)
Just take a look at the picture after the police finished beating Kelly Thomas. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what killed him.
http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/warning-graphic-photo-of-fpd-beating-victim/
The police know only too well that delaying this pronouncement as long as possible will cause people to forget about what happened and then they can go right back to their killing ways.
I didn’t hear the radio interview, but it is abundantly clear in the article above that this is a “what if” piece – speculation on what would be necessary and sufficient for a DA to make certain charges.
There has been no determination of fact in the article – because that’s not the point of the article, as I understand it.
The major benefit of the piece is to help us interpret the kind of public servant the DA will reveal himself to be when he makes his decision on whether or not to file charges and, if so, what the charges will be.
By understanding the legal options available to the DA that Cabaniss presents, we will have a better understanding of what Rackaukus is really doing when it comes time for his decision.
Ruehle is correct, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what caused the tragic death of Kelly Thomas. It takes a medical doctor. And for the purposes of this situation, it takes a forensic medical examiner.
Ruehle seems to believe he can personally handle the job after looking at an extremely graphic photograph. Ruehle seems to have deluded himself about a great many things.
Some here seem to take my sincere questions and my other comments as somehow making excuses for FPD. They are mistaken. This police use of force was horrific by any objective standard. If it is proven that any of the officers involved violated policy, procedure or law, they should be punished to the fullest extent possible.
As a former law enforcement professional I am just as anxious as anyone else, perhaps even more so, to see police misconduct first proven, and then punished.
But just as with any other question of criminal responsibility or civil liability, Ruehle’s inflammatory, insulting and often fraudulent rhetoric will not get us there. Neither will Mr. Cabaniss Esq.’s torturous and purely hypothetical constructs.
The only things that will get us there are painstakingly thorough investigations, the *facts* that these investigations uncover, and the reasonable evaluation of those facts by medical and legal experts and then, if warranted, by judges and juries.
Anything short of that is purest academic speculation and serves no constructive purpose.
Here’s some facts about the Fullerton Police Department misconduct in the Kelly Thomas case:
Initially, the Fullerton Police released to the press as justification for killing Kelly Thomas that a police officer sustained broken bones while trying to restrain Kelly Thomas. That was proven to be a lie when police admitted later that no police officer suffered broken bones.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/30/protests-investigation-follow-police-beating-of-kelly-thomas/
Then the City of Fullerton claimed they never tried to persuade Kelly Thomas’s father with $900,000 to keep his mouth shut. That lie was also disproved when Ron Thomas provided the written offer from the city’s attorney.
http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-common/mlib/616/08/616_1312413089.jpg
http://boscotheblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/thomas-family-offered-900k-to-settle.html
An now we find out that yesterday’s public record request to Fullerton Police disproves the original Fullerton PD’s statement that their officers were called out to investigate car burglaries when they approached Kelly Thomas.
http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Police-Reports-Auto-Burglary-July-5.pdf
If a civilian lies, they are prosecuted. If a cop lies, they are promoted.
LB resident here, but brutality of this case & coverup for the officers moved me to get involved.
Let me break it down.
5 cops beat and tasered on Kelly Thomas (who was on the ground) until he was in a coma and near death. They smashed his face into the cement curb and kept him there.2 cops max could’ve cuffed and arrested him. All witness videos were confiscated at the scene.
There is a weekly protest to the corruption and coverups that happened here. Every Saturday, 9a-3p in front of the Fullerton police station. If you can’t be there the whole time, come out for whatever you can. There are extra signs ready when you get there.
237 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92832
Come exercise your free speech rights and demand that these officers be held accountable for their actions.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=237+W.+Commonwealth+Ave.,+Fullerton,+CA+92832&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x80dd2a08fea8e413:0x2ed86099324b2e30,237+W+Commonwealth+Ave,+Fullerton,+CA+92832&gl=us&ei=cR5gTr3QDavWiALLxq28Dg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CBoQ8gEwAA
Given the reluctance of the Orange County DA to investigate/prosecute police misconduct, this entire incident could of been a few words in the OCRegister and lost in the next day’s news cycle.
Without a wide public discussion of the events that night and the Thomas family & the public’s outrage and demand for justice and information, Kelly Thomas would be just another dead crazy homeless person who was killed as the police tried to “restrain” him.
And more troublesome, this seems to be standard operating procedure for the Fullerton PD, as the officers involved were allowed to see the videos of the beating prior to giving statements on what happened. (The public has not been allowed to see this video.) The union head City Spokesman tried to contain the damage by falsely suggesting to the media that Kelly had been burglarizing cars, that police officers were injured by Kelly, and by releasing photos of a crazed mentally ill man (Ron Thomas claims that photo was not of his son).
janis, if you can demonstrate how the public record request you linked disproves the Fullerton PD’s statement that the officers were called out to investigate car burglaries when they approached Kelly Thomas, I would very much like to see you do so.
That the officers involved were allowed to see videos of their use of force prior to filing their reports on what happened should not concern anyone. It is standard and accepted practice for officers to review notes, photos, and audio and video recordings while filing their reports. All this does is allow the officers to make sure their reports reflect as many of the facts surrounding an arrest as can be reasonably verified.
The videos no more tell the entire story of this incident than the officers’ or supervisors’ reports or the computer printouts do. They are all but pieces of a very large and complicated puzzle, just as the bus video, and the witnesses statements, and the medical reports, and a thousand other bits of information are.
There is enough abut this tragic incident to find fault with and, perhaps, to correct. Conjuring boogey men is not necessary.
Now Greet is telling everyone what they should and shouldn’t be concerned with. His arrogance is amazing.
But then again, he was a Long Beach cop.
janis, I’m not sure it was “reluctance” on the part of the OC District Attorney. Consider that OC District Attorney Tony Rackauckas immediately assigned DA Investigator Stan Berry to the high-profile Fullerton case.
It turns out Stan Berry is close personal friends with Fullerton Police Chief Michael Sellers. In fact, Sellers hired Berry as an investigator when he was the Seal Beach Police Chief and Seller’s wife Rita Fraser-Sellers, are close personal friends with Berry and his wife, Kristen Berry, the Dispatch Supervisor in Seal Beach. They socialize together, vacation together and entertain each other in their respective homes.
Of all the DA investigators, OC District Attorney Tony Rackauckas chose Berry. And why would he do so other than to help cover for the police? Nothing like a huge conflict of interest in a very high-profile investigation.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4z8A8lvFZw4J:www.workingmannews.com/kellythomastimeline7282011.html+fullerton+police+chief+%22michael+sellers%22+%22stan+berry%22&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Ruehle seems to believe that my suggesting that something should or should not concern somebody else demonstrates arrogance. If true, then he must rightly be considered to be among the most arrogant posters on this site because that’s pretty much all he ever does. Well, when he isn’t offering insults and posting false, fraudulent, and otherwise misleading comments, of course.
But then again, he does have a documented history of criminal conduct.
Even so, he does raise some very valid concerns and circumstances that, at least on their face, could indicate serious conflicts of interest.
Perhaps that’s why the FBI and the State AG’s office are both involved in, or at least monitoring, the investigations and why the Fullerton City Council has hired a county investigator that is completely independent from the DA’s office.
John B. Greet. murder apologist.
Considering Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley’s dad was a cop, and his election support by police unions, many of the same conflicts of interest exist between the Los Angeles County DA and all LA County police departments . Just look at the preferential treatment the City of Bell Police Chief Randy Adams got from LA County DA Cooley compared to all the other Bell Officials charged with crimes. City of Bell Police Chief Randy Adams was the second highest paid city official behind Bell City Manager Rizzo at $457,000 per year. Yet DA Cooley did NOT investigate Adams. Yeah right. No conflict of interest in the LA County District Attorney’s office.
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2010/09/steve_cooley_randy_adams_bell.php
Thanks for your juvenile and entirely unsubstantiated input, howardx.
Perhaps what is happening in Fullerton (FBI and State AG involvement and an independent county investigator) should also have happened in Bell.
LA County DA Steve Cooley has this below email exchange between Bell Police Chief Randy Adams and #2 Bell City Official Angela Spaccia. Adams got off scott free after making $770,000 per year. Yet eight other Bell city officials (NOT including Adams) were charged with crimes.
“I am looking forward to seeing you and taking all of Bell’s money?!” Randy Adams wrote shortly before starting the job. “Okay … just a share of it!!”
“LOL … well you can take your share of the pie … just like us!!!” responded Angela Spaccia, the city’s assistant administrator. “We will all get fat together … Bob has an expression he likes to use on occasion,” she continued, referring to her boss and chief administrative officer, Robert Rizzo. “Pigs get Fat … Hogs get slaughtered!!!! So as long as we’re not Hogs … All is well!”
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/14/local/la-me-bell-emails-20110215
Ruehle: What exactly do you mean when you say: “LA County DA Steve Cooley has this below email exchange between Bell Police Chief Randy Adams and #2 Bell City Official Angela Spaccia.”?
Greet: What exactly do you mean when you say: “Ruehle has a documented history of criminal conduct.”
Ruehle: I mean exactly what LA Times reporter Louis Sahagun meant two years ago when he wrote:
“Adding a new wrinkle to the controversy, the Press-Telegram disclosed that Ruehle is on probation in connection with his arrest two years ago for drunk driving and speeding on 2nd Street. In an interview with The Times, Ruehle acknowledged the incident, saying, “I made a mistake.”
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/14/local/me-belmont-shore14
So I guess a better question might be, what did YOU mean when you acknowledged your arrest and probation?
So are you going to answer MY question now, or continue to evade and deflect?
It’s completely inappropriate and not germaine to bring up any body’s history of DUI in the context of this statement. In fact I consider it to be bullying behavior intended to make Mr. Ruehle shut up. Come on, John, that is the ultimate fallacy in a debate: the ad hominem attack. It says to me you have run out of any thing logical to say.
As far as the cops getting to watch the videos before filing a report? Really? Kelly Thomas didn’t get to review the videos to make his case, did he?
The cops are under investigation. They should not get to watch the tape. In fact, they should be interviewed first, immediately and fresh on the scene–the way it would be done if a civilian were a suspect, ir heck even a witness. And you can’t tell me this isn’t done. I was recently a witness to a serious event and was sequestered and detained–because I was a witness. I wasn’t allowed to talk to anyone or use my phone while I had to wait to be interviewed. And in this incident there was video evidence which then the detective watched with me AFTER me interview. and it corraborated my testimony–not the other way around.
Ms. LB, The only time I bring up Ruehle’s past as a law breaker, is when he either injects it into the conversation himself (as he did here) or when he chooses to bring up my past as a law enforcer. Neither are usually germane to any topic he and I are discussing yet he repeatedly injects his petulent and juvenile variations on “So says former LBPD Officer Greet.” Fine, if my past is relevant, then his must be also. Right?
The cops were NOT under investigation when they reviewed the videos. They reviewed them contemporaneously, following the tragic use of force, so as to file their required police reports. This occurs all the time in police work and it is not improper, unlawful, or counter to policy. In any and all serious incidents of this sort, the officers are *required* to file their reports before they can even end their shifts.
Those who are taking exception to this in this case are applying 20/20 hindsight to their poor understanding of how the police document all serious incidents of this sort.
Give everyone a break Greet. You were the FIRST to blab it all over multiple comment boards. You were the one who provided the exact information from my police report. How fast I was traveling, what my blood alcohol content was. Everything. I think I’d know since I was the one you were writing about.
You now try to back away from your cowardly attacks that you assisted. We both know what you did you piece of dung. And that’s all that matters to me.
Proof, Ruehle. Provide proof are your accusations in this case have no more significance than all of the rest of the accusations for which you offer no proof. You are a person entirely without honor, Ruehle.
Look at this:
Reflection of light from pool of Kelly Thomas’s blood on cement next to cop car.
Cops not treating it as a crime scene. Casually milling about it.
http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Kelly-Thomas-Crime-Scene-02.jpg
more:
http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/ffff-exclusive-the-crime-scene-photos-that-the-fpd-forgot-to-confiscate/#comments
Go flush yourself John Greet. You are almost as much swine as the six thugs in uniform. And don’t try to pretend you can comment on honor.
This is what happens when we live in a society that believes in what law enforcement does and says. No one questions that as a matter of fact how many of you have applauded when cops beat up a criminal and then say things like good, ef him, on and on. Well it is kind of like a small child in the sand box that keeps throwing sand at another child and the parents go oh how cute. In other words we condone the bahavior and so then when abhorrent things like this happen what is one to think? Well the cops thought that everyone was going to approve of their behavior, after all we have all cheerleaded for them when they beat up a known criminal. This was what the babboons in blue the heroes as they are called thought.
Yes, Phillip Dru, quite enlightened and enlightening of you. Almost as juvenile, petulant, and insulting as Ruehle. Almost.
Keep working at it, though, you just might get there one day. Ruehle’s had a lot more practice after all.
I do not condone what happened in Fullerton, because I do not yet know all, or at least many, of the facts surrounding what happened…and neither does anyone else here.
If any of the officers are proven to have committed misconduct in Thomas, I will be right there with many here who are so very anxious to condemn them.
But how about we await an official finding that Thomas’ death was, in fact, a homicide before we start hypothesizing and theorizing and considering various manufactured “facts,” about whether it was unlawful and, if so, which crime would be most appropriate to charge one or more of the officers with?
How about that?
That’s not the way the patriots in the American Revolution did it, John.
Re: oldschoolGOP , how much of our societies views on policing and catching the “bad” guys comes television and movies?
Jack Bauer in 24 hrs beat, tortured, and killed people to get information to save the world and that was entertainment. …
The dog leash on the neck, hooded figure with the electrical cords, sitting on detainees, pictures of genitals; the photos that were taken by soldiers in Abu Ghraib probably thought the same, that they were in Iraq as heroes and that images of them abusing torturing prisoners were amusing and patriotic.
What about the six cops beating on Thomas? Kelly’s condition after the beating should of immediately kicked off a criminal investigation of the officers. They should of been treated like suspects of a crime not viewing evidence so they could write reports. The fact that Fullerton PD management treated this incident like business as usual says a lot.
One thing that is not being talked about is the impact of the late night rough bar crowd that has developed in downtown Fullerton. Cities often encourage new bars with alcohol to develop revenue. One of the defenses I heard for Legends was that this establishment was that it was largest single generator of sales tax in the 3rd district.
Yet look at the enormous pressure these types of businesses place on law enforcement. Remember a few years ago residents in Belmont Shore were demanding more policing after 2 am? One of the reasons given for the staffing level was that police wanted at least two officers together to handle calls and there was no budget for this. Then what happened on 2nd street, an officer shoots a drunk, probably would not have happened if there were 2 officers on the scene.
Same deal in Fullerton. The bar scene in downtown Fullerton is out of control and attracting a drunk rough crowd. Is it the police department’s fault when the city council and ABC keep approving businesses that require additional enforcement personal but no budget?
janis, totally agree with you. Long Beach’s Mayor and City Council set the policy and tone for how the Police Department is to work with the community. It is their job to be out in front, talking to the community to better understand, how or if, to modify city policies. Yet, take the Zerby hose nozzle killing by the Police, or the Rodriguez shooting in Belmont Shore. Not a single elected official was to be found. They all hide behing the City Attorney’s skirt, claiming they aren’t supposed to get involved.
Such behavior wasn’t acceptable to the residents of Fullerton who are now organizing the recall of the Mayor and two Councilmembers who didn’t support firing Fullerton Police Chief Sellers.
The question to ask is why aren’t Long Beach residents doing likewise? How many people have to be killed by Long Beach police before the community removes from office their chief of police and the elected officials who chose to ignore the problem.
Hi Mr. W:
I would forcefully beg to differ. “The patriots in the American Revolution” first went to great and repeated lengths to appeal to their government for a redress of their various grievances, but all to no avail.
The “…long train of abuses and usurpations..” listed in the Declaration were neither novel nor new to either the colonists or the crown. They had been included in dozens of previous official written petitions to the crown, but all previous appeals fell on deaf ears.
The Declaration ultimately, and quite definitively, ended “… the patient sufferance of these colonies…” It was a path of extreme last resort, however.
Before the colonists finally resolved “…to alter their former systems of government…” they stated their various cases clearly and forcefully many, many times.
They produced clear and irrefutable *evidence* of their grievances, supported by objectively verifiable *facts*, and presented these to their government over and over again.
When the colonists, for example, presumed to accuse a british soldier of murder, they presented facts that supported such accusations. Today, people like Ruehle and others are not interested in facts or in evidence. They simply seek to impugn and denigrate police officers to suit their own selfish purposes.
Neither is our duly elected civil government of today anything even closely resembling the monarchy found in Great Britain and, by extension, the colonies in the 18th century. Today, the police are representative of civil authority, duly appointed by those the voters freely elect to represent them.
No, Dave, our civil government is ours…the people’s…as represented by a majority of the voters. If a majority of us are truly dissatisfied with the performance of our civil government, we have the authority (and the responsibility) to change it, wholly or in part, during any and/or every single free election that it seems right and proper for us to do so.
Because this is so, armed revolution is no longer necessary to effect popular and significant change in *any* aspect of our government, including the executive branch, of which our civil police forces are but a part.
All folks need do is inform themselves, based upon facts (real facts, not the made-up, academic, hypothetical sort) and then act on that information by exercising their individual franchise to vote.
Yet fewer and fewer of us can seem to be bothered to do so, or to do so intelligently.
I find that very sad.
I agree with Ruehle that whenever a tragic incident like the Zerby or Rodriguez shootings occur, our elected Mayor, Council should be right out front, right away, expressing regret over the incident, informing the public of the “facts” as they are known, assuring the people that they will, in turn, assure that all susbsequent investigations are conducted properly and without favoritism of any sort.
They should encourage the public to be patient in their grief and concern, and understand that such tragedies require the most meticulous of investigations and that this, unfortunately, takes time. If there is a reasonable concern of a conflict of interest they should immediately request independent oversight of the investigation by the state attorney general or another independent investigative body.
During tragedies like these, I think our Mayor and Council can accomplish all of this -quite publicly- without assuming any civil liability on the part of city government and, so, by extension, the people of Long Beach.
Mr. Greet, isn’t your referral to Ruehle’s “documented history of criminal conduct” meant to detract from the points he is making? It is the kind of statement that is used to influence all of the law-abiding citizens who believe that whatever police officers do is justified because certainly whoever they are questioning certainly must have done something wrong to begin with. Furthermore, when police treat the person they arrested roughly, law-abiding citizens either believe that the criminal was resisting arrest, or that’s what they get for breaking the law. Add a few comments in there about drugs and you’re home free.
Your referral to Ruehle’s DUI arrest in the context of the discussion of what happened to Kelly Thomas is disingenuous. The issue is the behavior of the FPD, not Ruehle’s criminal history. The widespread outrage at what happened seems to have taken people in the law enforcement community by surprise. You’re used to having people believe you and believe in you. What seems to be even more surprising to police is that people are willing to support Kelly Thomas even if he was doing something wrong. Still scratching your head? The point is that even some genuine, law-abiding citizens have concluded that what happened to Kelly Thomas never should have happened no matter what excuses that the police give.
Right now, many people are distrustful of the police. Unfortunately, your history as a law enfocement officer puts you in the category of people who may not be entirely trustworthy. Therefore, your comments are likely to be viewed with a certain degree of suspicion. Doesn’t feel good to be on the other side, does it?
Hi JRB: As I mentioned to Ms. LB, please note that in almost every single case in which I mention Ruehle’s past history as a law breaker, it is in direct response to his mentioning *my* past history as a law enforcer.
Neither are particular relevant to most discussions, but Ruehle persists in making his own past relevant every time he chooses to reference mine.
Whenever reference is not in direct response to his raising mine, it is in direct response to his bringing up his own past history himself. I encourage you to trace back in any thread on this site or any other, and you will see that this is so.
It is so in this very thread, where, as usual, the first mention came from Ruehle, on September 2nd, where he injected his typical: “But then again, he was a Long Beach cop.”
My own comment “in response*: “But then again, he does have a documented history of criminal conduct” clearly *anteceded* Ruehle’s own.
Ruehle routinely chooses to assert my past history as a law enforcer in apparent attempts to assert that this somehow serves to undemine my credibility. Fine, it that is to be deemed acceptable, then, in complete fairness, it must also be deemed acceptable for me to mention his own past history as a law breaker as an assertion that this could also serve to undermine his own credibility.
If Ruehle doesn’t like these mentions from me about his criminal past, he can easily avoid them by avoiding his own mentions where my own lawful past is concerned.
If you have followed other strings in which he and I have participated and where he did not see fit to mention my past as a law enforcer but where another has brought up his past as a law breaker, I have quickly defended him and admonished others that Ruehle’s criminal past is not relevant to the discussion at hand.
Unfortunately, Ruehle sometimes *makes* it relevant by either mentioning it himself, or by mentioning my own past in clear attempts to undermine my credibility.
As they say, quid prop quo. What’s good for my goose must rightly be seen as equally good for Ruehle’s gander. Do you disagree?
There have been two occasions that I know of when I have brought up Ruehle’s criminal past extemporaneously. In each case he chose to offer insulting judgments toward others who have been arrested and/or convicted for DUI. He did this in the case of former LBFD Capt Hines and in the case of LA Dep. D.A. Seymour. In both cases Ruehle chose to cast aspersions on both of those people and upon their agencies or offices. I found these references to be exceedingly hypocritical of him, given the circumstances of his own past criminal conduct in this area.
Ruehle is no stranger to hypocrisy, of course. He routinely accuses others of lying and other falsehoods while often committing those same sorts of rhetorical offenses himself. He routinely accuses others of concealing or twisting facts while often resorting to the very same tactics himself in efforts to convince others of his various positions.
This is precisely why I believe Ruehle to be entirely without honor. Because he condemns others for offenses he commits, or has committed, himself. Because he accuses others of offenses but offers no proof to support his accusations. Because whenever his comments are proven false he rarely acknowledges the truth or attempts to correct the record. He simply moves on to the next unfounded allegation or falsehood.
Recently, on another site that Ruehle also frequents, I proved some comments of his to be blatantly false. After I did so, using his own words as definitive proof, he uttered not a single word of acknowledgement…not a single attempt to correct the record. He has since simply moved on to other comments on other threads.
Here’s chapter and verse of how that one went down:
Greet: “Previously, Ruehle claimed the DA had never prosecuted an(y) LBPD officer for any serious crime. That claim was false. Rather than admit to his falsehood and correct the record, he has simply revised it to “…for killing someone.” Ruehle is the quintessential hypocrite…lies while accusing others of lying, ridicules others for DUI, having committed the same offense himself. Sad.”
Ruehle: “If the “claim is false” like you state, please cite the cases prosecuted by the LA County DA that refute what I said. The only time anyone hears about a court case involiving a Long Beach Police Officer is when the public is forced to file a CIVIL suit because the City Attorneys and LA County DAs refuse to CRIMINALLY prosecute the lying, raping, stealing Long Beach cops. You keep claiming I’ve already listed the cases. However, the cases I listed were not prosecuted by the LA County DA. They were either civil cases or cases prosecuted by a District Attorney from another county who has no chummy relationship established with the Long Beach Police.”
Greet: “Ruehle forgets about the former LBPD officers he, himself, reminded us all of right here on this site, just last May: Padilla in ’87, Ballew in ’92, and Ellsbury in ’94. He not only reminded us of them, but provided links to news stories about them. All former LBPD officers, and all “cases prosecuted by the LA County DA”…and all of which refute what he said. Sad.”
http://belmontshore.patch.com/articles/differing-account-of-lbpd-shooting-of-ismael-lopez
I was raised to understand that people should not accuse other people of things without proof. I was raised to understand that doing so is both dishonest and dishonorable.
Ruehle, however, repeatedly makes such baseless accusations and for a long time I read his rhetorical nonsense here and elsewhere and let it go.
I have simply decided to start challenging him on his nonsense. If he dislikes this level of attention, there is a very simple solution…he can stop commenting in such a dishonest and dishonorable fashion.
As to people viewing what I have to say with suspicion. That’s entirely their right nor is it an experience that is, to any degree, new to me.
I would simply suggest that they read all of what I have to say on a matter and not merely the misrepresentations offered by others who have their own dishonorable agendas. In the context of this specific case I would encourage them to note that I said, quite clearly:
“Some here seem to take my sincere questions and my other comments as somehow making excuses for FPD. They are mistaken. This police use of force was horrific by any objective standard. If it is proven that any of the officers involved violated policy, procedure or law, they should be punished to the fullest extent possible. As a former law enforcement professional I am just as anxious as anyone else, perhaps even more so, to see police misconduct first proven, and then punished.”
Now, folks can be as suspicious of that statement as they like, but their suspicions do not make what I said any less true or sincere.
Mr. Greet, you make me sad.
I’m sad that you can’t make decisions for yourself. You have to wait for lying reports and investigations to finish. Where is my proof they’re lying?… I don’t have it. Where’s your proof what they say is true? Sure, I have a strong view of what happened here in Fullerton, and it does cloud my thoughts sometimes, but as a whole I’d bet your job the cops involved did not do it correctly. How do I know? Someone died. Someone died who would not had died without the contact with FPD. So something they did affected him. What did they do? We have 6 uninjured cops, and one bloody mess of a body. Does that sound like they did things right? If I do something wrong at my work of this magnitude, I’m fired.
Now I’m just rambling. Greet, if the process is flawed with people who have lied from the beginning, you can’t wait for their “facts.” If you believe everything police tell you, you are a fool. Cops can be bad, and in this case, they are. And they’re not helping themselves.
Think the justice system is fair for cops and firemen? Think again.
Yesterday, Long Beach Fire Captain John David Hines pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of alcohol causing BODILY INJURY, driving with a blood-alcohol level above the legal limit, and HIT AND RUN with INJURY with sentencing ENHANCEMENTS for causing GREAT BODILY INJURY and having a blood-alcohol level more than .20 percent (0.24 percent).
Jeffrey Gordon, the man Hines ran over and left for dead spent two weeks in the hospital in critical condition with head trauma, severe lacerations and bruising to his head and body, internal injuries and spinal and vertebrae injuries. He continues to suffer limited physical mobility and speech and memory loss, prosecutors said.
According to the Orange County DA, guess what his punishment Long Beach Fire Captain John David Hines is expected to receive.
PROBATION.
http://belmontshore.patch.com/articles/fire-captain-hines-pleads-guilty-in-dui-hit-and-run
Not only that, Hines will be allowed to keep his job as Captain in the Long Beach Fire Department and his EMT certificate, #E030577 remains intact.
A man prosecuted last May by Deputy District Attorney Andrew Katz, the same DA, for stalking and threatening a cop was given 5-years in prison. Yet a fireman who committs a DUI hit and run is let off with no prison time. Where’s the justice?
http://articles.ocregister.com/2011-05-20/news/29569783_1_judge-william-monroe-gary-kim-girlfriend/2
lbon: You shouldn’t give others so much power over your feelings.
Despite that you and some others dislike that misconduct and criminal and civil liability must be proven, through the discovery and due consideration of facts, this is the standard that our society thankfully abides by.
Many guilty people go free for lack of factual evidence, but far better that than one innocent person be wrongly convicted because some were overzealous and were willing to relax our various standards of proof.
I fully acknowledge that what I do know of this incident does not speak well for some or all of these officers. If they are to be punished or held civilly or criminally liable, however, their guilt must be proven…based upon facts…the real sort of facts, not the conjured, hypothetical sort non-facts offered by Mr. Cabaniss, Esq. and some others.
It is my understanding that the FBI, the State AG, and an independent County investigator are all either overseeing or actively participating in the Fullerton investigations. I don’t really know what else can reasonably done at this point other than to allow the investigations to proceed.
I do feel confident, however, that nothing of either a constructive or productive nature is accomplished through the many assumptions most here seem so anxious to leap to.
Ruehle, did you gaze into your crystal ball to tell us all what will happen on or around Dec. 2, or is this just more of your natural omniscience bubbling to the surface once again?
Do you have any proof of Hines’ employment status with the city because, unless I am mistaken, GLB has not yet been able to get that information confirmed.
Do you have any examples to offer of cops or firefighters who have been convicted of similar offenses yet retained their jobs with the city?
Nor have you yet provided proof of your accusations lodged against me yesterday. Either offer proof or your accusations in this case have no more significance than all of the rest of the accusations for which you offer no proof.
Offer proof of your accusations, just as I did in your case, or you shall have proven yourself to be a person entirely without honor.
[...] 31- Mark Cabaniss, an attorney from Kelseyville, Calif., posts an editorial on The Greater Long Beach website articulating the DA’s options in regards to the case. Cabaniss poses a felony murder charge [...]
Mr. Greet, thanks for responding to my post. Yesterday was the first time I have read anything on this site. I am not familiar with the other strings that you referred to in which both you and Ruehle have posted comments.
I reviewed the string and acknowledge the sincerity in your statement about Kelly Thomas. I will also acknowledge the objective nature in which you have agreed with some of the issues that people have raised, even when you disagree with other opinions they have.
On an intellectual level I would like to say that I agree with you with respects to “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander”. However, I feel a certain amount of unease with respect to this that I am having a hard time putting into words. The best way I can describe it is that, like it or not, the police are in the “hot seat” right now. Multiple questions, concerns, and accusations are being made about police behavior. If a member of the public raises a legitimate concern about what’s happening, it doesn’t really matter what kind of background that person has, criminal or not. Also, even if something feels like an accusation that’s not based on fact, the public still deserves a reasoned response. Remember, it is the police who are being looked at in this case. Whenever you respond by pointing out someone’s criminal background you are appealing to all of the law-abiding citizens to come to your defense. It is meant to deflect attention away the police and onto someone else. Oftentimes there is very little sympathy for someone complaining about police behavior if they’ve been arrested. Again, “that’s what they get for getting into trouble to begin with”. Furthermore, anyone who has been arrested knows that they have to “keep their nose clean” and that anything that they do or say will be used as further evidence of their guilt. Since the police are the ones whose behavior is at question, they are the ones who should be acting nobly in this situation. Right now, it is the police who need to be answering for their behavior, not other people who are calling them on it. Fair or not, it doesn’t matter whether someone who is giving their opinion or making an accusation has a criminal past. The police are the ones who have to answer for their own actions. Any attempts to deflect attention away from the police only further inflames negative feelings and distrust.
I understand that a complete investigation, including as much fact-finding as possible, will be necessary to obtain any convictions in this case. I will also agree that the general public does not have all of the facts. However, here’s the problem–the general public does not trust the Fullerton Police Department who are holding key pieces of evidence, most notably the videotape from the bus station. I am not from California but I gotta tell ya that the behavior of the FPD has all the appearance of “circling the wagons”. From my perspective, the OC DA is right in there with them. As a more general statement, I don’t think that police misconduct cases should ever be handled by the DA’s office that regularly prosecutes cases for that police dept. Almost by definition, it seems to be a conflict of interest. Let’s use a “goose and the gander” example for just one part of what is going on. If the police involved in this situation have nothing to hide, why haven’t they spoken to the DA’s office? Why haven’t we heard their side of the story? After all, this is the standard that is usually applied to anyone else who is suspected of a crime, right? Why not let the police search your car, home, etc if you have nothing to hide? If you don’t, you must be hiding something.
You don’t seem to understand why people are incedulous when you refer to the need to establish whether the police followed protocol or not. Really??? Do you have any idea how scary it is to think that beating someone to death would be within any police department protocol? What crimes warrant the death penalty in California? Did Kelly Thomas murder someone? There are multiple witness acounts that police were beating Kelly before he was taken to the hospital. If a group of people were found to be beating someone outside a bar and that person died, how long would it take for them to be arrested? Wouldn’t they immediately be arrested and charged and then the police would continue their fact finding? Wouldn’t the DA modify the charges if the facts did not justify the original charges?
An indisputable fact is that Kelly Thomas is dead. It is also a fact that he suffered multiple traumatic injuries before he died, including the fracture of his ethmoid bone within his skull. I am in the medical field Mr. Greet and I can tell you that a significant amount of force was applied in order for this to occur. Although this might not be election time, the public is telling you that this kind of police behavior is unacceptable.
@ JRB: Thanks for your comments and for acknlowedging the truth of much of what I have said, especially concerning the most dishonorable person named Ruehle.
As for your opinions concerning Thomas’ tragic death, they seem, to me, at once well-formed and both cogently and respectfully stated. This discussion between the two of us is *precisely* the manner in which intelligent, reasonable, courteous, and mature adults tend to discuss matters of potential disagreement. We do not resort to ad hominem attacks, or the offering of personal insults. When we make an allegation we offer proof to support our contentions or else we withhold our accusations until a time when we will be able to support them with proof.
Others here might consider taking some notes concerning the respectful and mature manner in which you have chosen to discuss this issue with me. Thank you.
As I have said many times and in various ways, this tragic incident certainly does not look good for some or all of the Fullerton officers involved.
Unlike some here, however, I simply am not prepared to assume information that, as yet, has no factual basis…that is, information that has not yet been proven. Unlike some here, I am not the least bit interested in responding extemporaneously from purest emotion. Responding in that way seems to help others feel better, I suppose…much in the same way a child rolls about on the floor and kicks his or her feet and screams while throwing a tantrum…but it serves no truly productive or constructive purpose. It does not uncover any new factual information. It does not analyze the factual information that is known in any rational or deliberate manner.
Once Thomas’ tragic death is ruled a homicide (and I tend to believe that it most likely will be) then we can reasonably move on to a dispassionate and intellectual discussion about whether or not his death at the hands of another was the result of a deliberate or negligent criminal act.
Many people are angry about this tragic death. I get that. The poor manner in which the incident was initially handled by the Fullerton police chief and some Councilmembers only served to contribute to that anger, and, I think, rightly so. To be constructive, however, I think these people should channel their anger into productive civic action, in the form of casting informed votes in the next general election in Fullerton.
Those Councilmembers who were responsible for bungling the initial handling of this terrible incident should be removed from office and replaced with others who can perform better under that sort of pressure.
Those who are angry but cannot vote in Fullerton’s elections should actively support the campaigns of those who will be running to replace the Councilmembers who should be removed.
In this way, and some others, people’s anger can be channeled into action that will make a real *difference* in addressing this challenge. Far more of a real difference than engaging in academic and thoretical discussions based upon conjured and hypothetical “facts”, ever can or ever will.
I will close by repeating: “Some here seem to take my sincere questions and my other comments as somehow making excuses for FPD. They are mistaken. This police use of force was horrific by any objective standard. If it is proven that any of the officers involved violated policy, procedure or law, they should be punished to the fullest extent possible. As a former law enforcement professional I am just as anxious as anyone else, perhaps even more so, to see police misconduct first proven, and then punished.”
JRB,
To give you a little background, two years ago when I was president of the Belmont Shore Resident’s Association, I was an outspoken critic of many city policies and the police department handling of bar issues in Belmont Shore. The city’s way of shutting me up was to publish my 2-year old DUI arrest with MY PICTURE on the FRONT PAGE of the SUNDAY edition of the Long Beach Press Telegram.
Murders are back page news for the Press Telegram. Yet, somehow, my then 2-year old DUI warranted front page news. Other than to embarass me into shutting up, why would anyone care about Mike Ruehle’s 2-year old (now 4-year old) DUI?
Don’t let Greet distance himself from his role in my besmirching as a Long Beach Cop. Long Beach Police Officer Greet wrote on numerous media comment boards about my DUI and the details of my police arrest report, linking his comments to the Press Telegram article in his every attempt to tarnish my questioning of City Hall.
This is my ominous “criminal history” that Greet continually brings up. He knows it very well because he was right in the middle of it being made as public as possible to shut me up.
Give it up, Ruehle. You have no proof of these repeated and utterly baseless allegations against me.
Mature adults possessed of any sense of honor and moral decency do not lodge accusations against others which they cannot prove. I guess that might give us some indication of just what sort of adult you really are.
Meanwhile, I defy you to deny that on several occasions I have personally admonished people on these boards that I do not believe your past criminal history has anything to do with whatever the topic at the time happened to be.
I defy you to deny that I *personally* assisted you in confirming that LBPD personnel had, in fact, filed several reports you made, despite your repeated *false* allegations that those reports had never been filed.
The only time I challenge you on your past, now, is either:
1. When you choose to challenge me on mine (goose meet gander) or,
2. When you choose to behave as a hypocrite and comment judgmentally about others who have done what you, yourself, have done (make a conscious choice to drink and then drive and subsequently get caught and prosecuted for doing so) (pot meet kettle)
The surest way to never see me mentioning your past again is to stop mentioning mine in blatant attempts to undermine my credibility and to stop commenting hypocritically about others who, like you, have been convicted of, or prosecuted for, DUI.
BTW, are you interested, yet, in acknowledging that your assertion was false that the LA DA has never prosecuted a Long Beach cop for a serious crime? Are you yet willing to correct the record on that score?
Or are you going to allow your deafening silence on that matter to continue to speak for itself?
As I suspected, Ruehle’s will allow his deafening silence to speak for itself, concerning his false statement that the LA DA has never prosecuted a Long Beach cop for a serious crime.
Despite that I used his own words to *prove* his statement was false, he will not acknowledge his falsehood or correct the record.
This should tell readers all they need to know about the blatantly dishonest manner in which Ruehle often chooses to comment on sites like this.
[...] 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 [...]
I will be quite happy when these three things happen-
1. The authorities take the 6 murdering, poor excuses for police officers into custody for the murder of Kelly Thomas
2. A jury of their peers finds them all guilty
3. Ron Thomas stands up in open court during the vicitim’s impact statement and faces the cowards who killed his son
heck, make it four things……
4. Police apologist/testaliar/fraud John B. Greet takes his tired act to pacovilla.com, or some other police circle jerk that might actually care for his biased slant on things
Chad, are you able to point to a single thing that I have said that has indicated that I am apologizing for anyone, that I have lied about anything, or that anything I have said has been in any way fraudulent?
If so, please do so. If not, then I think that will be a very telling comment about your own approach to debate and discussion.
Comment from John B. Greet on September 8, 2011:
“Next time you might consider doing the mature, courteous, and respectful thing and simply asking me about it, rather than misusing the information you find in blatant attempts to impugn a person’s character.”
UNANSWERED question repeatedly asked Greet on same comment board per HIS request:
“Was part of your previous job responsiblities to comment in some way on these media?”
Poor Ruehle, unable to dictate terms to others on this or any other site upon which he participates.
Appropriate comment from another post:
Dave Wielenga
September 7, 2011
Oh, John Greet, every time I think your heart cannot get colder … Why don’t you go to the demonstration and ask Ron Thomas what he is protesting? I’ll go with you. I’d like to watch. (I know, you’ve got to work.)
Poor Ruehle…
The Fullerton Police killed Kelly Thomas on July 5th and the OC District Attorney has yet to file charges. Meanwhile, a man who threw his son off a boat in Newport Harbor on AUGUST 28th has been arrested and charged with a felony by the OC District Attorney.
The cops kill Kelly Thomas and there are no charges after 70 days. Yet, the SAME DA has been able to interview over 55 people aboard a crowded cruise ship and file felony charges against a NON-COP after 15 days.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/boat-317051-briles-son.html
Ruehle seems unable to perceive the clear differences in both the severity and complexity of these two cases.
Given the several layers of additional independent investigatory scrutiny that have been brought to bear on the tragic Thomas case, it seems reasonable to me to believe that the OC DA is doing everything humanly possible to invistigate the Thomas case as carefully, methodically, and completely as possible. Unless I am quite mistaken, the coroner has not yet even officially ruled Thoms’ death to be a homicide.
Until that happens, it seems to me that the OC DA is rather limited on how far he can proceed.
Personally, I think I would have preferred to see the appointment of a prosecutor completely independent from the DA’s office. Perhaps this could still occur. The State AG is said to be monitoring this investigation closely. I wonder whether that might be an appointment AG Harris could make on her own authority, either with or without the City’s or County’s consent?
If anyone OTHER THAN a cop had killed Kelly Thomas, that person would be charged and in jail by now.
The NON-cop killer of Melody Ross was jailed and charged after two weeks and has now been sentenced to life in prison 22 months later.
http://www.lbreport.com/news/sep11/rossjury.htm
Lack of evidence did not prevent the DA from arresting and pressing charges and against Giovanni Ramirez (later exonerated) 52 days after the near fatal beating of Bryan Stow at Doger Stadium.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/07/21/ramirez-exonerated-2-suspects-arrested-in-giants-fan-beating/
Meanwhile, the OC District Attorney can not provide a time frame when it will be determined (75 days and counting) whether the Kelly Thomas killing was a homicide (killed by the hands of another). Nothing like delaying the outcome in hopes the attention will abate and the cops can be let off the hook to kill some more.
Ruehle’s argument here is fallacious, since none other than police officers would have come into contact with Thomas in the specific circumstances under which the Fullerton officers came into contact with him.
Melody Ross was murdered by members of a criminal street gang who were in the process of committing a felony crime using a firearm. The Fullerton officers who used force against Thomas were acting in the performance of their lawful duties as sworn peace officers.
It may eventually be determined that one or more of the Fullerton officers caused or significantly contributed to Thomas’ death through either malice or negligence. If so, they will surely be charged as such, whether criminally or civilly, and prosecuted or sued on that basis.
The DA does not determine cause of death, the coroner does that and the DA can do nothing in that regard until the coroner issues his official ruling on the matter.
The FBI, the State AG, an independent county investigator and the plaintiff’s attorney are all monitoring the Thomas death investigation very carefully, and rightly so.
In the mean time, people should avoid unfounded allegations and baseless assumptions.
Concerning the Stow beating at Dodger Stadium:
1. DA’s dont generally make decisions about who should or should not be arrested
2. The LA DA *did* make the decision to not prosecute Ramirez. This was a *good* thing, right?
3. The OC DA should be held responsible for arrest decisions made in LA County
4. Ruehle compares two incidents from different counties which have absolutely nothing in common. Although it is difficult to be sure, he *seems* to be arguing that Fullerton should arrest the officers in “Kelly” now, just so the OC DA can exonerate and release them later. This hardly seems a wise course of action in the Kelly case, but perhaps it makes perfect sense to Ruehle and some others
Above statement by recently retired Long Beach Police Officer John B. Greet:
“The Fullerton officers who used force against Thomas were acting in the performance of their lawful duties as sworn peace officers.”
Greet would have all believe everything he states as FACT. Yet, the rest of us are to withhold discussing our opinions on this subject until we all forget it happened. Greet is the ONLY one allowed to have an opinion on the matter.
It is my opinion Fullerton police officers murdered Kelly Thomas under color of authority, similar to what Long Beach Police officers did to Douglas Zerby for having the bad luck of holding a hose nozzle.
According to the OC Register:
“The incident happened about 8:30 p.m. Tuesday when officers went to investigate reports of a man trying to burglarize cars in a parking lot next to the bus depot in the 100 block of South Pomona Avenue, Fullerton police Sgt. Andrew Goodrich said. Officers spotted a shirtless man with a beard, shorts and a backpack who they suspected of being involved in the attempted burglaries, Goodrich said. The man began to fight officers as they tried to search him, Goodrich said.”
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/officers-307824-thomas-goodrich.html
What the OCR has reported here is, indeed, descriptive of people “acting in the performance of their lawful duties as sworn peace officers.” This article, and many others that have since reported about this tragic death, form the basis for my comment.
I have never once asked or even encouraged anyone to “withhold discussion on this subject until we all forget it happened.”
This assertion on Ruehle’s part is false.
Discussion is good and healthy. Accusing people of professional misconduct or civil or criminal offenses before knowing as many of the facts as possible, however, is *not* good and is *not* healthy.
Mr. Ruehle can develop any opinion that he likes, just as I and anyone else can. While it may very well be proven that one or more of these officers committed murder, that has not been proven yet.
Likewise with Zerby, who was *not* shot for having bad luck or for holding a hose nozzle.
That assertion on Ruehle’s part is also false.
Comment from recently retired Long Beach Police officer John B. Greet:
“I have NEVER once asked or even encouraged anyone to WITHHOLD DISCUSSION on this subject until we all forget it happened.”
Previous Greet comments showing he’s a liar:
“But how about we AWAIT an official finding that Thomas’ death was, in fact, a homicide BEFORE WE START hypothesizing and theorizing and considering various manufactured “facts,” about whether it was unlawful and, if so, which crime would be most appropriate to charge one or more of the officers with? How about that?”
“When we make an allegation we offer proof to support our contentions or else we WITHHOLD our accusations until a time when we will be able to support them with proof.”
“Unlike some here, I am not the least bit interested in responding extemporaneously from purest emotion. Responding in that way seems to help others feel better….but it serves no truly productive or constructive purpose.”
“Once Thomas’ tragic death is ruled a homicide… THEN we can reasonably move on to a dispassionate and intellectual DISCUSSION.”
Ruehle’s excerpts do not, in any way, refute my assertion that I have never once asked or even encouraged anyone to “withhold discussion on this subject until we all forget it happened.”
His weak and ineffective attempts in this regard only serve to underscore his apparent inability to meet me in the arena of ideas in an intellectually honest manner.
Such deceptive practices of his serve no constructive purpose and, in fact, only serve to further undermine his own credibility.
Yet I suppose we can expect to see still more of the same, as well as clear evidence of his many other false, fraudulent, and otherwise misleading methods.
Quote from recently retired Long Beach Police officer John B. Greet:
“Such DECEPTIVE PRACTICES of his serve no constructive purpose and, in fact, only serve to further undermine his own credibility.”
Apparently, quoting what Greet writes is considered a “DECEPTIVE PRACTICE.”
Is there no limit to Greet’s idiocy?
Why do you persist in your false, fraudulent, and misleading methods, Ruehle? Do you truly lack so much confidence in your ability to hold your own in a discussion that doesn’t involve such utter nonsense?
Greet is such a putz.
Why do you persist in your false, fraudulent, misleading, and insulting methods, Ruehle? Do you truly lack so much confidence in your ability to hold your own in a discussion that doesn’t involve such utter nonsense?
What Greet said after howardx commented about Greet’s on-line resume:
“Next time you might consider doing the mature, courteous, and respectful thing and SIMPLY ASK ME about it, rather than misusing the information you find in blatant attempts to impugn a person’s character.”
Greet then responded with the following comment after howardx did EXACTLY as Greet requested:
“I do not care to answer any questions for you, howardx.”
Two Fullerton Police officers have been charged with murder and manslaughter
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/09/da-announces-kelly-thomas-murder-charges.html
Officer Manuel Ramos has been charged with murder and involuntary manslaughter in connection with the beating of 37-year-old Kelly Thomas, a homeless schizophrenic man. Officer Jay Cicinelli has been charged with manslaughter and excessive use of force.
I am really glad this case is moving forward. So many have been so frustrated over the length of the various investigations. It is horrible to learn that there exists probable cause to believe that two sworn Fullerton peace officers have unlawfully caused Kelly Thomas’ death.
If Ramos and Cicinelli are convicted, I hope they each pay the maximum criminal and civil penalties allowed by law.
Police officer misconduct is never acceptable. Misconduct that rises to the level of criminality is particularly despicable. Criminal misconduct that results in the wrongful death of another is the most despicable of all and, once proven, must be punished swiftly and severely, both as a penalty to those who committed the act, and as a discouragement to others who would ever consider such behavior.
Recently retired Long Beach Police Officer John B. Greet is the same guy who questioned what Ron Thomas would be protesting after his child had just been murdered by Fullerton Police Officers.
This invoked the following response from Dave Wielenga:
“Oh, John Greet, every time I think your heart cannot get colder … Why don’t you go to the demonstration and ask Ron Thomas what he is protesting? I’ll go with you. I’d like to watch. (I know, you’ve got to work.)”
You are correct, Ruehle. I am a recently retired police officer, just as you have a documented history of criminal behavior. What do either of those facts have to do with this discussion?
You are also correct that I asked if Ron Thomas had said what the topic of the protest at the OC DA’s office would be. I also explained to Dave why I asked. In keeping with your typically dishonest tactics, however, you conveniently didn’t bother to include *that* response, but only Dave’s.
As is usually the case, you choose to deflect the discussion from the topic at hand and turn it into an offering of insult toward me and for not other reason than because I had the temerity to ask a very simple and reasonable question. All it required was a simple and reasonable answer.
But you seem to need to personalize every discussion. You seem to take personal offense that anyone should dare to hold an opinion that diverges from your own, or dare to ask questions in a sincere attempt to acquire knowledge.
Get over yourself, already!