• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer[W:173:381]

Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

Excon said:
So you are just spouting off nonsense withouyt any factual information to back up what you say. Figures.
Like I previously said. The only flagrant display here, are the assertions coming from your biased imagination.
Click to expand...

You have a slam-dunk for the prosecution because they had audio-visual of the entire thing, you have cops and DA trying to cover it up initially (perhaps you've forgotten the Mexican standoff with DA Racockass and the surveillance video that went on for days, while he allowed the cops to review it and get their story straight - they could have even deleted segments of it), and the same DA prosecuting his buddies that he tried to help, which is a clear conflict of interest. The video speaks for itself. Sure, Thomas was being a smartass, but , last I checked, being a smartass is still legal.

You attempt to justify the murder by suggesting that normal police conduct calls for smartasses to be beaten to a pulp until they are unrecognizeable and dead. You keep parroting the ridiculous notion that these 6 cops couldn't take down this 135 lb. unarmed (and pleading for his life) homeless guy, and cuff him without beating him to death. 135 lbs.??? The video doesn't and never will corroborate these pathetic claims that 6 trained healthy cops' lives were in danger at any time. That's why if the jury was not bribed, then they were misled by less than honest jury instructions.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

`
ric27 said:
Believe it or not some of my hardest brawls have been with handcuffed individuals.

Unless you were there, feeling what the officer/officers felt (from a physical resistance point of view) you simply cannot judge or are in a position to say the officer was wrong and to terminate....remember, the video everyone thought would convict the officers in the Rodney King incident acquitted them in the state criminal trial.

NO incident is the same, none
Click to expand...

The video allows us to be "there". The video doesn't show the cops' lives being threatened. It shows them attacking someone and escalating, not subduing.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

Excon said:
Ah hello?
Have you not been paying attention?


The coroner's office determined that Thomas died of brain damage from lack of oxygen caused by chest compression and other injuries sustained during his struggle with police.

Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer - latimes.com​

That is a direct result of his resisting.
If he hadn't resisted he would still be alive.

You force police to get on top of you to subdue you, and you are responsible.
Click to expand...

so they beat him fatally but not to death
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer[W:173]

dolphinocean said:
For those who are interested in the opening argument of the Kelly Thomas trial, here's the video:
Click to expand...

I want to see the closing arguments, or any other part of the trial than the meaningless opening arguments that Racockass posted to try to show that he "tried". You have to be incompetent to not successfully prosecute a case like this - or deliberate malpractice. I think most interesting, however, would be the judge's instructions to the jury. Ron Thomas should request that the jury instructions be made a matter of public interest.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

blarg said:
so they beat him fatally but not to death
Click to expand...
Umm...I don't think that's what the bolded line says.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

The Mark said:
Umm...I don't think that's what the bolded line says.
Click to expand...

That is a direct result of his resisting.
If he hadn't resisted he would still be alive.

You force police to get on top of you to subdue you, and you are responsible.

so it may not have been murder or man slaughter but that doesn't seem to change the fatal beating how legal it was
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

sKiTzo said:
You have a slam-dunk for the prosecution because they had audio-visual of the entire thing,
Click to expand...
What an absurd thing to say. :doh
No you don't.
I can see that Kelly was resisting and that the Officers were responding to it.
The jury saw it also. So it was not a slam dunk for the prosecution.


sKiTzo said:
you have cops and DA trying to cover it up initially
Click to expand...
No you don't. That is nothing more than your imagination.


sKiTzo said:
while he allowed the cops to review it and get their story straight
Click to expand...
Another thing that you can ot prove even happened.


sKiTzo said:
they could have even deleted segments of it), and the same DA prosecuting his buddies that he tried to help, which is a clear conflict of interest.
Click to expand...
You have no evidence that would suggest such.
It i seven ridiculous to even assert such given that the Prosecutor charged them in the first place.
All you are doing is trying to insert absurdity where it is not needed.


sKiTzo said:
You attempt to justify the murder
Click to expand...
You clearly are only asserting imaginative bs.
There was no murder.


sKiTzo said:
by suggesting that normal police conduct calls for smartasses to be beaten to a pulp until they are unrecognizeable and dead. You keep parroting the ridiculous notion that these 6 cops couldn't take down this 135 lb. unarmed (and pleading for his life) homeless guy, and cuff him without beating him to death. 135 lbs.???
Click to expand...
He was not beaten to a pulp. He was recognizable. And he was not beaten to death.
These assertions are nothing but figments of your own biased imagination.


sKiTzo said:
The video doesn't and never will corroborate these pathetic claims that 6 trained healthy cops' lives were in danger at any time. That's why if the jury was not bribed, then they were misled by less than honest jury instructions.
Click to expand...
You are clearly wrong on all accounts.
It is more than clear that it took great force to overcome the great force Kelly was exerting in his resistance.


sKiTzo said:
It shows them attacking someone and escalating, not subduing.
Click to expand...
More absurdity.
The video clearly shows the Officers trying to subdue a resisting Kelly.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

blarg said:
so they beat him fatally but not to death
Click to expand...
:doh They didn't beat him fatally either.

Most of what occurred was wrestling the resisting Kelly.



blarg said:
That is a direct result of his resisting.
If he hadn't resisted he would still be alive.

You force police to get on top of you to subdue you, and you are responsible.

so it may not have been murder or man slaughter but that doesn't seem to change the fatal beating how legal it was
Click to expand...
Striking a resisting individual is allowed.
Nor was his death caused by his being struck. He died from asphyxiation which was a result of his chest being crushed. That is not being beaten to death.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

Excon said:
:doh They didn't beat him fatally either.

Most of what occurred was wrestling the resisting Kelly.



Striking a resisting individual is allowed.
Nor was his death caused by his being struck. He died from asphyxiation which was a result of his chest being crushed. That is not being beaten to death.
Click to expand...

so crushed fatally but legally look it seems excusive to me but i wasn't their so may it was not excusive and it was ruled legal but the guy and in all likely hood all the officers and every one else who might have been around would still be alive if thing had gone down differently on the officers part 1 guy vs 6 and the 1 guy was unarmed or might have been able to acquire them means to stun some 1

i dunno
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

blarg said:
or might have been able to acquire them means to stun some 1
Click to expand...
Apparently most folks that take his side are willfully overlooking the fact that despite the strikes and the multiple taserings, he was still resisting.
And the fact that it took that many Officers to subdue him because of his resistance.
Are you one of those overlooking that significant information?
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

Excon said:
Apparently most folks that take his side are willfully overlooking the fact that despite the strikes and the multiple taserings, he was still resisting.
And the fact that it took that many Officers to subdue him because of his resistance.
Are you one of those overlooking that significant information?
Click to expand...

no I get he was resisting just fine it just doesn't change that the officers injured him fatally in their efforts to subdue him im even if those efforts were legal and in the line of duty
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

blarg said:
no I get he was resisting just fine it just doesn't change that the officers injured him fatally in their efforts to subdue him im even if those efforts were legal and in the line of duty
Click to expand...
Even if those efforts were legal and in the line of duty?
Yeah it does pretty much matter. That is the whole point.
There actions were in response to his actions, and occurred in the legal performance of their duties.
And while tragic, makes them non-criminal.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

sKiTzo said:
`

The video allows us to be "there". The video doesn't show the cops' lives being threatened. It shows them attacking someone and escalating, not subduing.
Click to expand...

I see some people continue to get way out of their lane on topics of this nature, especially people who should know better

1 An unruly non compliant homeless *with nothing to lose* can easily infect LEOs with HIV, HepB, HepC, TB, etc.

2 It's beyond retarded about size/weight differences....A 102lb 14 y/o can put a pen/comb/thumb through your eye just as easily if not faster than a 300 lb mofo.

3 LEOs are needed to control persons that are unable to control themselves. Thinking about a "fair" fight in the streets is utter bs

Drop, the monday morning quarterbacking. You simply don't understand the force continuum, what is feasible, or what the options were at that time
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

The Mark said:
He did indicate, however, disagreement as to whether the police actions were justified or not. Unless I misunderstood.

If that is the case, I repeat: I do not need any specific knowledge of the video to realize that if two differing opinions on it's meaning exist, misinterpretation must be present.

If not ric27, perhaps Excon as an example.
Click to expand...
Your so-called indication as to whether the police actions were justified or not was his evasion, not disagreement to my point regarding Kelly on the ground and pinned. Nobody on this forum or any other internet sites commenting on this case has ever disputed about Kelly being on the ground and pinned down by the police. It's so patently clear in the video.


You may have a point about individual interpretation on people arguing about police action and justification but that does not make you the sole impartial judge to accuse one side or the other of "misinterpretation". And like I said, you refused to watch the video so you shouldn't even persist on spouting nonsense about the video which you have no idea whatsoever.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

ric27 said:
Kelly as well as King did have it coming. Kelly (the offender) is/was in control of his future. Good behavior results in zero problems, smooth booking process and open lines of comms which is what is needed

By acting violently (oc, tased, cuffed whatever ) violence is violence. He should expect the appropriate amount of force would be used to overcome his resistance. A decision made by the LEO. The offender summoned this use of force by his behavior. Had Kelly complied and been a gentleman he would be treated as such.
Click to expand...
Evasion much? So, I'm not going to be drawn deeper into your evasion. Your original point was that the six police officers needed to protect themselves from Kelly. And my point is that Kelly was on the ground and being pinned down, beaten and tased by the six men. So, what's there to protect?

My previous post should have read "There was brawl NO coming from Kelly Thomas...."
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer[W:173]

Excon said:
:doh
Never said you did, did I?
Duh!
I stated a fact which places the video in proper perspective.
Click to expand...

Nobody else ever said the opening statement was evidence. So, why would you be compelled to state a fact which places the video in proper perspective out of the blue?

Do you go around yakking "the earth is not flat...the earth is not flat...the earth is not flat..." when nobody ever even asserted that the earth is flat just so you can state a fact which places the video in proper perspective?

If you do, you need your head examined.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer[W:173]

sKiTzo said:
I want to see the closing arguments, or any other part of the trial than the meaningless opening arguments that Racockass posted to try to show that he "tried". You have to be incompetent to not successfully prosecute a case like this - or deliberate malpractice. I think most interesting, however, would be the judge's instructions to the jury. Ron Thomas should request that the jury instructions be made a matter of public interest.
Click to expand...


I know, it seems like this is yet another case of the prosecution throwing the case either for political reason due to powerful police union or simply to protect ones of their own. Unfortunately, they only released the video recording of the opening argument. The trial itself and the closing argument weren't made available to the public. Not even the jury instruction. So, we are just left to wonder.

BTW, I read from some tweek that the jury foreman was an attorney who once worked for the DA's office and another juror had some connection to the defence. I can't verify whether the info was true or not but take it with a grain of salt for now.

But, here's another video of eye witness interview regarding Kelly's murder:

 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer[W:173]

Here is the video of the immense police brutality inflicted on the innocent homeless guy:

 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

blarg said:
That is a direct result of his resisting.
If he hadn't resisted he would still be alive.

You force police to get on top of you to subdue you, and you are responsible.

so it may not have been murder or man slaughter but that doesn't seem to change the fatal beating how legal it was
Click to expand...

They just started swinging their batons at Thomas, who posed no threat at all. To say they were "forced" by Thomas to do this, is delusional. Of course, you will disagree, even while watching the video. Somehow, you'll imagine Thomas lunging at them with "great force" when the video shows clearly that's not what happened. How pathetic you cop-lovers will resort to this.

To everyone out there debating with these people who fecklessly attempt to contradict what our own eyes and ears tell us when we watch the video: Don't waste your time. It cannot be more obvious they work for damage control...OR have some information-processing impediment. Futile either way.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

dolphinocean said:
Your so-called indication as to whether the police actions were justified or not was his evasion, not disagreement to my point regarding Kelly on the ground and pinned. Nobody on this forum or any other internet sites commenting on this case has ever disputed about Kelly being on the ground and pinned down by the police. It's so patently clear in the video.


You may have a point about individual interpretation on people arguing about police action and justification but that does not make you the sole impartial judge to accuse one side or the other of "misinterpretation". And like I said, you refused to watch the video so you shouldn't even persist on spouting nonsense about the video which you have no idea whatsoever.
Click to expand...
I did't refuse, I just can't be bothered to find and watch it.

I never had any intention of accusing anyone.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

dolphinocean said:
not disagreement to my point regarding Kelly on the ground and pinned. Nobody on this forum or any other internet sites commenting on this case has ever disputed about Kelly being on the ground and pinned down by the police.
Click to expand...
:doh
It took multiple strikes, taserings and 6 Officers to finally get him pinned.


dolphinocean said:
Nobody else ever said the opening statement was evidence. So, why would you be compelled to state a fact which places the video in proper perspective out of the blue?
Click to expand...
Out of the blue? iLOL
:doh
Stating a fact for those who would review the video, is relevant.

Your opposition to that fact being stated tells us all we really need to know about your intent in providing the video.

Too bad.



dolphinocean said:
Do you go around yakking "the earth is not flat...the earth is not flat...the earth is not flat..." when nobody ever even asserted that the earth is flat just so you can state a fact which places the video in proper perspective?

If you do, you need your head examined.
Click to expand...
:lamo:lamo:lamo
Dude. Get a grip. If not, follow your own advice.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

sKiTzo said:
They just started swinging their batons at Thomas, who posed no threat at all.
Click to expand...
Wrtong.
They started swing their batons because an individual who had laid his hands on an Officer (showing he was a threat), failed to comply with their instructions.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer[W:173]

dolphinocean said:
Here is the video of the immense police brutality inflicted on the innocent homeless guy:

[video=youtube;Hl42F9lNCoo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl42F9lNCoo[video]
Click to expand...
iLOL Immense police brutality? :doh
It shows no such thing.
It shows injuries that Kelly sustained while resisting.

It is remarkable that there isn't more injuries.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

Excon said:
Wrtong.
They started swing their batons because an individual who had laid his hands on an Officer (showing he was a threat), failed to comply with their instructions.
Click to expand...

"Laid his hands" on an officer? Are you sure about that? Like I said, I'm not going to waste my time.
 
Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

sKiTzo said:
"Laid his hands" on an officer? Are you sure about that? Like I said, I'm not going to waste my time.
Click to expand...
If you are not going to waste your time, why the hell are you asking?
Yes he laid hands on the Officer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom