The news you're not supposed to know...

Multimedia

An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand Everything

The Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires

The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility

The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes Off

Operation Gladio: The Hidden History of U.S. Sponsored False Flag Terrorism in Europe

The New American Century: The Untold History of The Project for the New American Century(more)

Analysis posted May 14 2013, 9:24 PM

Category: Tyranny/Police State

Source: InformationLiberation

Cotati, California Cops Enter Disabled Vet's Home, Taze Him in Front Of His Family

Chris | InformationLiberation

Via TheRetrosoldier on YouTube:

These officers do not believe in the Constitution or the rights it protects...

The Backstory:

Police are called out to an apartment for a noise compliant by the neighbors. The three occupants inside non-aggressively exercise their fourth amendment right, refusing the police entry as they demand at gun point to let them inside without a search warrant or probable cause.

As the police quickly holster their weapons after the camera turns on, the three occupants continue to exercise their rights non-aggressively. The police respond by going into "over-the-top" aggressive mode, utilizing excessive force by kicking in the door, assaulting the female and tazing the cameraman four times causing the camera to short out. All three occupants are arrested/cited for obstruction.

Here's his latest comment:

Good day, I am the cameraman. I am an unemployed disabled veteran from Afghanistan. My wife is a preschool teacher. The third person is a family friend. Our day started with our only car breaking down while taking my wife to work. We just received our tax refund on Tues. and had planned to get it repaired that weekend. When my wife returned home, we discussed the car situation. I proposed getting a new vehicle with the refund rather than repair this problem child of a vehicle. My wife disagreed.

It's clear from the video the cop used his taser as a tool of "pain compliance" rather than a tool of self-defense. I don't know what triggered the call, so I don't know if I can say whether or not the seemingly warrantless entrance was justified (at least according to the state's laws).
_
Chris runs the website InformationLiberation.com, you can read more of his writings here. Follow infolib on twitter here.

SHARE:

Email This

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Unarmed Man Charged With Wounding Bystanders Shot By NYPD Officers
- "If We Have To Get A Warrant... We're Gonna Shoot & Kill Your Dogs... Ransack Your House"
- CPS Nabs Teenager Because She Was Hanging Out With Black People
- Pentagon Changes Drone Strike Rules To Permit Bombing Civilians
- Around Here, We Don't Call Internal Affairs
- Does Politeness Constitute Probable Cause?
- This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories
- Lawyer For Cop Charged In Beating Death Of Homeless Man Claims Officer Didn't Use ENOUGH Force

Comments 1 - 12 of 12

Add Comment

Page 1 of 1

Anonymous

Posted: May 15 2013, 7:25 AM

Link

20138

Keep in mind, though anonymous I have posted here a good deal, and am a fan of this site and all it brings to the light, I've indicated I'm not always impressed by the political "solutions" here, though I agree SOMETHING needs fixing with law enforcement in the US.

Still, as much as I hate seeing this video, I'm not sure about the law. Just a few items down from this one you have one entitled "It's time for Private Defense" and regarding the terrible situation in Clevelend it is written "In November 2001, a neighbor called the police when he heard screaming at the Castro home, but officers left when no one opened the front door." and other indications of police neglect in followup. YET...you can't have it both ways. I'm guessing from the facts presented here in this story, some neighbors called because the family was arguing. They refuse the police entry, and here are critisized for forcing their way in, in Clevelend for NOT forcing their way in. You can't have it both ways, and these two situations are more alike than different. Also, the tasering was unecessary, of course, but for all they knew, this family may kidnapped, or bad things going on in this house just like in Cleveland.
Some kind of balance is needed.

h1976

Posted: May 15 2013, 11:50 AM

Link

9822

I don't believe anyone is critical of the police in Cleveland for failing to helter-skelter break into the house tazers a blazing. Some anonymous call saying they saw someone just standing at a window wouldn't be adequate cause for such action. There was an occasion where multiple people, people with names and faces who live in the vicinity, reported that there were unknown women wearing nothing but dog collars crawling around the back yard. With this report you still don't bust down the door and start shooting, but it is time to do some investigating and find out who they were and what has become of them, especially when you consider that the police must have had some kind of dossier on Castro regarding his spousal abuse. The failure in Cleveland was a failure to investigate, similar to the situation in Cotati, California.

Anonymous

Posted: May 15 2013, 3:47 PM

Link

17444

Bottom line you don't look to the state for solutions or justice. You trust in God and Jesus and you wait on them. No one is entitled to justice in this life. Americans are a weak people who just call the godless police for bullshit like they here arguing well human beings argue once in a while. Governments don't provide justice the bigger they grow the more injustice we will get.

Anonymous

Posted: May 15 2013, 7:06 PM

Link

46105

Well the difference is that all the people in the house told the police that there was no reason for them to enter the home. You can't compare that to a situation where no one answers the door after reports of what sounds like someone being held captive in a house.

Which means we are not asking for it both ways. The point is that the police always seem to want to over exert their power when no crime is committed and where there is a real crime, they would rather not get involved.

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 6:21 AM

Link

80202

46105, that is pretty ridiculous to say. So the police on YOUR planet can be totally fooled by someone just saying "uh no, everything is fine here, go away!"?

You seriously don't know that the guy in Cleveland would quite possibly, I've he had been home said exactly the same thing this family did? You guys are getting selective about the facts, and making stuff up, straw man style. Nobody said Cleveland police should bust into every home,etc. They were CALLED to that home by neighbors. Possibly several times, but at least once we know of. They left because no one was home. Correction, it's written that way, but all they could know is nobody came to the door. I don't agree that this family here ought to have been tased, cops use those things way too easily and when they started using them promised it would only be instead of shooting which it never is, they still shoot as much or more even though they have tasers.
BUT, when neighbors called, reported fighting in this house ,the cops do not need a warrant if they believe someone may be being harmed in the house, it's similar to hot pursuit, it's also necessary, but should not be a abused. They had a duty to make sure things were ok there.
Look, I hate the way the police have become in the US nowadays. They lie, pretend ridiculous things like that a smartphone "might be a weapon", just lies, and jack booted crap. I want talk to police, and know my rights. But in fairness, I have to point out that cops can't take some guys word for it when reportedly there was fighting going on. It was a breach of the peace, they have a duty to investigate. When they didn't (in Cleveland) look what happened. Is that what you want?

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 2:31 PM

Link

207166

That was funny.

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 2:33 PM

Link

207166

This should be on America's funniest video's

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 2:35 PM

Link

46105

80202

Non sense, are you a police officer perhaps?

Well i would agree with you, if the women was timid and not visible and the man was at the door saying there was nothing going on. Then I think there might be a reason to bust in and stop a potential domestic violence dispute. But this case, there was the woman and a third party in the house all saying that there was no domestic dispute that they were having an argument and they were simply exercises their rights.

The police on the other hand, ignored what they were saying and like hooligans decided to break in to the house and fire multiple tazers in to someone in their own home. Their is no justification for that.

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 2:40 PM

Link

46105

80202

You start by saying that IF and IF, then say i am getting selective about the facts. The fact of the matter is that this was a violent and unprovoked attack on innocent people in their homes. The comparison to Cleveland decade long rape and kidnap case is invalid and something that you have tried to bring in to the discussion to justify the police's brutal behavior.

You are the one that is trying far too hard to be on the police officers side by making ridiculous comparisons.

It is basically the same argument that is used for breaking peoples rights all over the world, "he could have been a terrorist argument" which means no matter what the police do, they can simply claim that the there was the potential for the person to be a terrorist so therefore any action is justified. This is what tyranny and out of control police state acts like.

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 5:02 PM

Link

68255

@20138,

Yes, you can have it both ways, it's called warrant. If there are sufficient suspicions about the criminal activity, it's no problem for the police to obtain the warrant - which is exactly what should have happened in Cleveland, and what should have happened in this case, provided that the police did see something, anything, resembling criminal activity - which does not appear to be the case.

In this case, we see not one but 3 violations by the police, assuming that what we saw in the video was all (maybe not):

1. No exigent circumstances for the warrantless entry. No cries for help, unusual movements, and such, indicating that someone inside is in immediate danger, and there's no time to wait for the warrant. Put a cop outside, go for the warrant. If you have enough evidence to convince the judge, return with the warrant and enter. If you have none, leave.

2. No probable cause at all for the entry, even with the warrant - so the warrant most likely wouldn't materialize. Neighbor's word is not nearly enough, the police has to see indications of criminal activity with their own eyes.

3. Tazing once inside, without any threat.

4. arrest for obstruction, when the obstruction is nothing but refusing to cooperate.

In fact, when the police is already inside, clearly there's not a word spoken about any domestic violence anymore. Which means that break-in and tazing had nothing to do with alleged DV, but were in fact punishment for non-cooperation.

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 5:20 PM

Link

69209

80202, the only way to achieve complete security is not even by putting all people in prison - because in prison they do occasionally murder each other - but to kill them all. You can't be 100% secure. Tragedies do happen. You can't create a law that would address every situation. Every society finds the balance between liberties vs. safety, and neither can be 100% perfect.

When society begins to react by changing way of life of millions of people after each and every accident, it's nothing but hysteria, knee-jerk reaction, and immaturity.

What happened in Cleveland, or on 9/11, or in other incidents, is tragic, but it does not mean that we have to throw out our Constitution and start doing things we were not doing for centuries. We have procedures of home search, we have warrants, we have laws, and if in one case specific officials failed to do their jobs, it does not mean that we have to throw all that away and invent new. laws.

Anonymous

Posted: May 16 2013, 5:36 PM

Link

69209

Remarkably, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaGAy5XEv-o, the vast majority of the comments approve what the police did.

"The couple were not co-operating & that's considered impeding an investigation"

"Job well done by the police. Exigent circumstances. Needed to investigate the claim domestic violence. Love how the guy screamed like a little girl when tazed!"

"obviously the man didn't want to cooperate. He got what he deserved lol"

"Good job officers."

Comments 1 - 12 of 12

Page 1 of 1

Add Comment

Name

Comment

* No HTML

Verification *

Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below

PLEASE NOTE

Please see our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.

About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy