Lindy wrote on September 16, 2009 08:01 PM: It doesn’t matter whether the guy had the taser or not, he should not have been murdered. I don’t know who trains these guys (Barney Fife?) but they’re uncontrollable. They get tunnel vision, they shoot their partners, and they don’t have a clue what’s around them. They’re psychopaths like Ted Bundy, and like Ted, they get aroused by killing and torturing people; it’s what passes for normal sex to them and they just become oblivious.

A few months ago I googled “cops shoot fleeing suspect in back” because I kept hearing it so often. It got a ton of hits and I read a hundred or so. Believe this – the details are almost identical to the ones in this case: they’re chasing some black kid and shoot him. See if the rest sounds familiar:

“He started to turn around and I thought he was reaching for his waistband.” Not guilty your honor!

“He sort of twisted half way and it looked like he was reaching inside his hoodie.”

“He slowed and turned in my direction and I thought I saw his hand reaching for his pocket.”

“He slowed and sort of looked at me and I thought he reached his hand up.”

“Yes? Reached his hand up and what?”

“He just reached his hand up. At that point I feared for my safety.”

“You feared for your safety to the point you felt you had to shoot him?”

“Oh, yes. That’s the way it always happens.”

“She reached her hand up…”

“She reached her hand out…”

“She reached up…”

gnome wrote on August 18, 2009 12:47 PM: Spartacus, you are on to something. While it may seem at first that friends and kin of victims seems the place to find your grass-roots citizens base, you would almost have to have an organization backing you or even victims' next-ofs would not come forth. So you'd need the ACLU or some existing civil rights-org to jump start and stand watch, take the lead and the first heat, with their advocating for your efforts. Where would you find such folks?

spartacusproject wrote on August 16, 2009 01:13 PM: To All Nevada Citizens:

Here is a novel thought. What about getting a group of citizens to form a committee and challenge these monster Metro killers.

Where are our wonderful attorneys that have so much relied on the public to pay their sorry way into a better life. Are you afraid of the little wimp, David Rogers? Afraid of loud mouthed judge, Jackie Glass? What are you afraid of to not be helpful to a sorry situation?

Are all of you cowards?

Show some leadership and stop these murders. Quit looking to make a civil case out of these killings, and a profit to your pocket.

Surely, you heroes aren't afraid of good ole silly-minded Gillespie--are you? Afraid he might set his good ole boys on your trail? After all, what could you have possibly done. That's the point: "You don't do anything constructive."


Nevadan's, you need to get some balls and step up to the plate.

Do it before it is you on the slab, or your family or friends.

This state owes more to the average citizens in terms of safety, than just to the rich and privileged.

We all know we can't depend on Harry Reid, or any legislator or governor to do the right thing. This state is ruled by cops and the rich and the politically connected, and let's not forget the Mormons.

Oh, yeah, tell me I'm wrong...

spartacusproject wrote on August 16, 2009 01:12 PM: Folks:

As an afterthought on the man shot in the trailer park but not killed by Metro. (I'm certain, Gillespie will order these guys to take more gun range practice.)

Is it possible the man was taking the knife out from under his shirt to show the police that he was surrendering the weapon--and don't shoot?

I know, a citizen shouldn't harbor thoughts like that, but it does come to mind--doesn't it?

After all, our policemen are so honorable.

What say ye, Sheriff Gillespie. Got another spin for us?

knowthemwell wrote on August 16, 2009 12:10 AM: Screamer, you've identified a formula that's obviously working at the inquests. That repeated claim that the suspect says 'Just kill me' before they're shot--in the back--empty handed--should make every citizen afraid. Can we conclude from this that suspects' wishes are always granted?... Or Only Just When They Use Those Magic Words?... Unexplained yet consistently 'justifiable' suspect shootings in Las Vegas prove, among other things, that the inquest process needs an overhaul or needs to go.

Brendan Perez wrote on August 15, 2009 09:42 PM: Remember that every power given to police also empowers dirty cops and impersonator cops.

Go back a few weeks to that dirtbag impersonating a cop who raped that woman.

When the police are allowed to shoot people in the back and this is well publicized, do you think a person is more likely to run from a person claiming to be a cop who is acting a little suspicious? If he is a cop, he can shoot you and claim you ran from him and most likely get away with it. If he's not a cop, he may rape or kill you. Kind of no-win isn't it?

What if instead of being an impersonator, the guy was a dirty cop? He encounters some woman, tries to assault her, she runs, he shoots her, claims she was resisting an arrest, he thought she was armed, blah blah blah.

Under a policy of "no shooting people in the back" it becomes really hard for a bad cop to defend his actions.

We see the same thing with the occasional "blue light rapist" incidents that occur. The police have been repeatedly shown to be aggressive and abusive to people who don't immediately pull over for them-this is contradictory to public statements by police about signaling and slowing down and waiting until you're in a well lit area.

The result is that people afraid that the person behind them isn't a cop and wait until they're in a well lit are are slammed around, arrested and have to spend their hard earned money getting their vehicle out of impound.
This uncertainty and somewhat unforgiving attitude by the police is then used by criminals posing as cops.

There should be firm boundaries for police-it protects all of us from dirty and impersonator cops.

No Justice In Vegas wrote on August 15, 2009 09:41 PM: Go figure, Lies lies and more lies, the victim is dead, and dead men don't talk. LVMPD conjures up a story with no one to refute it.

Does this really come as any surprise to anyone?

patrick wrote on August 15, 2009 09:41 PM: The inquests have to stop; they serve no purpose at all and are a waste of time and money.

Every officer who kills someone should be tried by a jury.

If they are found innocent, return them to the force, if they are found guilty send them to jail.

What's the problem don't the police have faith in our criminal justice system?

brian wrote on August 15, 2009 09:27 PM: Call me crazy but, I think its wrong for most of these officer involved murders to be called justified! Especially when there are several witnesses, none of which, testified to the tazer being pointed at the officer, Besides the tazer was introduced as a "non-lethal" weapon! So where was this officer justified to take another man's life? Perhaps he has been found innocent because he testified of the danger he "thought" he was in! Hey, it wouldnt be the first time someone lied under oath.

Then the 16 year old child who was shot , in the back, a couple years ago. Officer called justified in that case also. They handcuffed him with his hands in front of him and locked him in the front seat! How dangerous could he have been? The boys crime was heiness but everyone deserves their day in court("Guilty" until proven innocent)! The officers sure get theirs.

Sam wrote on August 15, 2009 09:18 PM: I attended the inquest and witnessed all 6 testimonies by 4 witnesses and both detectives. So, consider a few facts that the RJ omitted (omitting is the same thing as lying).

1. Cynthia Reed and her husband are both Vago outlaw motorcycle gang members. Their testimonies were very opposite of each other and not factual, which is odd because they were supposedly both in the same car.

2. The partner was far behind Det. Hendricks, why was never answered, and quite frankly it is uncalled for that she wasn't there to help. Afterall, she said she is a runner who runs daily, yet she fell several seconds behind in just a 2-3 minute run.

3. Det. Hendricks and John were all alone, yet one of the other witnesses did see the foot chase, and the shooting.

4. A citizen jury panel heard all of the facts. While only 4 of them had to come to an agreement on the verdict, they all 7 unanimously found the shooting justified after hearing all of the facts.

5. The victim of the sexual assault was 13 at the time it started, she is now 16. The assualts on her have been occuring for 3 years.

6. While there was no defense attorney, John's family was present and asking several "cross examination" type questions - all of which were witnessed and heard by the jury.

Maybe all of the cop haters should walk a day in a cops shoes. I can't imagine all that they must see. Besides, do you really think that everyone is submissive to police? Across the country, people decide to fight with police all of the time. Cops are killed daily, that is a sad thing when bad guys kill the ones who try to protect us. Good Job Detective!!!

Read All Comments