In California, a Black man was shot on Tuesday in the San Diego-area of El Cajon, by police. The unidentified individual, who died sometime later at a nearby hospital, was having some sort of “episode” and police had been called to the scene by the victim’s sister. The police say they received a call of a man acting erratically and when they arrived to investigate, the victim pointed an object at them, then placed his hands in his pockets and refused their commands to show his hands:
Chief Jeff Davis said a video taken by a bystander showed the incident but that the department declined to release it at this time. He also declined to identify the object.
Davis said the man refused multiple instructions from an officer and “concealed his hands in his pockets.” He said the man “drew an object from his front pants pockets, placed both hands together on it and extended toward the officers.”
One officer fired a Taser and another fired rounds from his handgun. No weapon was recovered at the scene.
The shooting sparked protests in the San Diego County city, with friends of the man's family saying he suffers from a mental illness and did not pose a threat to the officers.
Multiple witnesses to the shooting dispute the police’s version of events. Many of those witnesses recorded the event as it unfolded on their cell phones but report that police officers confiscated their phones. The ACLU immediately put out a statement of concern regarding the actions of the police:
The ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties was concerned to learn of the shooting of a Black man by police officers in El Cajon earlier this afternoon.
It is too early to know many of the details of the actual shooting and what preceded it, and we hope that the El Cajon Police Department and the San Diego District Attorney provide the public with answers as quickly as possible, with transparency and accountability for all involved.
Unfortunately, there are disturbing reports from a number of witnesses that police officers confiscated cell phones from people who witnessed the shooting. Confiscating cell phones is a violation of the Fourth Amendment (unreasonable seizure without warrant or exigent circumstance) and the First Amendment (interference with the right to record in public) under the U.S. Constitution and analogous rights under the California Constitution. It is hard to see any kind of Fourth Amendment exigent circumstances at issue here.
The First Amendment issues are also significant, because by seizing phones, police would likely be preventing the dissemination of video captured by bystanders. The public has the right to film police in public places, and police officers may not confiscate or demand to view your digital photos or video without a warrant. Under no circumstances may police officers delete your photos or videos.
We will be paying close attention as the details of this situation unfold and our thoughts are with the family of the shooting victim.
CNN reports that about 200 protestors converged at the location of the shooting, a restaurant parking lot, and at police headquarters after a press conference was called regarding the shooting.
NOTE: Whatever the outcome of this shooting, what we have here is another example of the "inviability of authority" that is so commonly practiced by the police. If you are stopped by the police walking down the sidewalk on your street, you have no recourse except to obey upon pain of death. Don't know about you but I'm not such a fan of this type of "community policing."
Then too, it seems that police officers aren't well equipped - or trained - in dealing with folks who are having some sort of mental breakdown as was the case here. The police knew that this man was acting "erratically" and the only way to counter this is by killing him?
Is A MUST Read: Take A Gander At This Amazing, But Little Known, 9-11 Story This incredible story is from a flight attendant on Delta Flight
15: On the morning of Tuesday, September 11, we were about 5 hours
out of Frankfurt, flying over the North Atlantic. All of a sudden the curtains parted and I was told to go to the
cockpit, immediately, to see the captain. As soon as I got there I noticed that the crew had that “All
Business” look on their faces. The captain handed me a printed message. It was
from Delta’s main office in Atlanta and simply read, “All airways over the
Continental United States are closed to commercial air traffic. Land ASAP at
the nearest airport. Advise your destination.” No one said a word about what this could mean. We knew it was a
serious situation and we needed to find terra firma quickly. The captain
determined that the nearest airport was 400 miles behind us in Gander,
Newfoundland. He requested approval for a route change from the Canadian
A NARRATIVE THAT ENABLES VIOLENCE AGANST US AS IT DID
PART ONE If you haven’t kept up with the right wing’s
latest attacks on liberals for protesting and resisting Trump then you probably
will disagree with me that I believe that we are heading for new wave of
violence against liberal demonstrators, protesters and resistors as well as against free speech and
the continued diminishment of basic civil and human rights right here in
America. We’ve seen such actions before
during the Civil Rights and Anti-Vietnam War days of the 1960’s.With our backs against the well, as they
surely are today, and the national atmosphere even more repressive with the
Trump Administration, you can depend on it. Why do I say what’s happening to us today
resembles what happened to African Americans during Jim Crow?In no way do I intend to portray the “plight”
of liberals and progressives today as analogous to the post Civil War situation
of African Americans following the passage of the 13th
THEY BOTH LOVE HARD DRIVING AUTHORITY AND “MAKING DEALS”
We all know that Donald Trump was only joking when he
implied that the Second Amendment Folks could take out Hillary if they wanted
to.And when he encouraged Russia to hack
Hillary Clinton’s emails so that her wrinkled Granny titties nefarious Clinton Foundation activities would be exposed for the world to see, we knew he wasn't serious. But Hillary is taking it from all sides of late, including from Wikileaks transparency uber patriot, Julian Assange, who seems to have a massive hard on "thing" for Hillary. Of course, we all know that Julian's long-standing beef with Hillary Clinton stems from the time she refused to have anal sex
with him she threatened to have him arrested, right?
While I’m totally 100% spit on my mother’s grave sure
not yet convinced that Putin is directly behind the e-mail hack and dump of the
Democratic National Committee (whose offices, by the way are just a few blocks
away from my ho…