Manhunt in SoCal, suspect is surrounded in a cabin, two officers down.

[G.T.Ace]

I have to throw this in, serious question at everyone who argues like Ridox:
Are you supporting Texas' and Florida's laws, that you are allowed to shoot anyone who's 'invading' your 'land' without any trial following?

 

[Wardez]

Police said the fire was an accident? Listen for yourselves:

 

[Maccer_42]

"Alright steve we're going to go forward with the plan... with the burn"

Say what?

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

I have to throw this in, serious question at everyone who argues like Ridox:
Are you supporting Texas' and Florida's laws, that you are allowed to shoot anyone who's 'invading' your 'land' without any trial following?

Don't know who told you that...

But if you think you can just shoot someone and the cops are just like "okay man; you're good" you're highly mistaken.

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

http://www.eurweb.com/2013/02/ex-la-cop-brian-bentley-on-dorner-manifesto-not-only-do-i-believe-it-but-i-lived-it/

When Brian Bentley joined the LAPD, he explains that it during the time that personnel complaints were not taken.

He remembers trying to make a complaint to his captain about the racism he experienced and was told, ‘I’ve been on the job for 35 years, you don’t think I know there’s racism. Who do you want me to bring it to? The deputy chief or the chief are just as racist?’ and then proceeded to kick him out of his office.

When asked if he thought the Department had changed since he was a part of it, Brian said no.

Diversity training for officers not just in how to deal with the community that they serve but with the officers they work with is part of what’s needed he says.

“Even though officers today can file personnel complaints—look at what happens,” he says referring to Christopher Dorner. “There are clearly flaws in the system and Dorner is just one example of something that African-American officers have been experiencing for decades in the LAPD.”

Brian said that he’s still in close contact with friends who are LAPD officers and he says that he knows for a fact that it’s still a bad environment for African-American officers.

Sadly he recalls the experience of three of his fellow officers who also had similar manifesto’s to Christopher Dorner’s, two Black officers and one white female officer, who instead of acting on their manifesto committed suicide. Something that Brian says is common amongst officers who are terminated and believe the Department has wronged them.

When asked if he believed the claims made in the Dorner manifesto, Brian is very clear.

“Not only do I believe it, but I lived it.”

After writing his book, Brian says that he was the subject of an investigation that was led by two officers profiled in his book that had been promoted to Sergeant and transferred to the Internal Affairs department.

Several interrogations later, including one that lasted 7 hours, Brian says that he was given a charge of misconduct for every incident of racism that he documented in his book that he didn’t report—thus giving him the most charges of misconduct in the history of the LAPD.

So why write the book?

Brian says that what was happening everyday in South Los Angeles at the hands of LAPD officers was wrong and he knew it was wrong. He felt that he needed to write about it and that what was happening needed to be exposed. He didn’t think he’d be fired for writing the book, reprimanded maybe, but not fired.

14 years later, today Brian Bentley is a father of three and fully invested in his children’s lives. He’s written a second a book, a novel entitled Honor With Integrity: A Journey Behind the Blue Line.

He’s closely monitoring the Dorner situation and hoping for a peaceful end for a man whom he says that while he doesn’t condone the killings, he can definitely understand his frustration.

For this ex-police officer, he has hopes that through Christopher Dorner’s manifesto that a real conversation can take place in Los Angeles about LAPD’s internal policies as well as the racism that still exists in the Department.

On whether or not the LAPD is capable of investigating itself, Brian doesn’t believe that it is possible.

“We’ve seen what happens when the LAPD investigates the LAPD.”

A condensed version of the police radio conversation :

"We gonna go forward with the plan, with the bomb, .... like what we talked about .."

 

[photonrider]

Big Brother is watching . . . but Big Brother is now the people.

 

[Keef]

A condensed version of the police radio conversation :

He says "burn" as the plan, not "bomb". It's clear from various sources linked on Drudge Report that police purposely burned the house down.



I hope Dorner is perfectly fine, making his way through the woods to the next place.

 

[Tornado]

So they went so far as to full-blown Waco him out to be rid of him. I'm shocked by this turn of events.

 

[Wardez]

What bothers me isn't that they set the thing on fire to get him out, they can do whatever the hell they want, they're cops, not soldiers. The big deal is that, yet again, they decide to straight up lie to the public about how the fire started, they refuse to change in the slightest, even with the biggest of spotlights are held right on them.

 

[Johnnypenso]

What bothers me isn't that they set the thing on fire to get him out, they can do whatever the hell they want, they're cops, not soldiers. The big deal is that, yet again, they decide to straight up lie to the public about how the fire started, they refuse to change in the slightest, even with the biggest of spotlights are held right on them.

It's the arrogance that comes from thinking you are above the law, that you can do no wrong, that the spin machine will just fix everything for you. Their story is going to be that they figured if they burned up the cabin he would run out and surrender as opposed to getting burned alive, and end the standoff without anymore bloodshed. Not sure how they will spin it so they knew he was in there all alone, but I'm sure they'll come up with something.

 

[playnthru]

It's all spin. Always has been.

News?

 

[Carbonox]

I hope Dorner is perfectly fine, making his way through the woods to the next place.

So he could possibly kill more innocents after getting himself back together?

Sorry, but as much as LAPD may be corrupt, I don't understand people who wish to have him running around in freedom.

 

[Barra333]

Sure are a lot of assumptions in there. If they did find schematics, a blind assumption on your part, how would that tell them anything except the basic structure of the building? How would knowing the basic structure of the building help them in any way other than to know where the rooms were? Since they obviously had no plans to storm the cabin and you can plainly see from the outside it's a wood structure, of what benefit would the plans be?

Sorry I can't give a source, but I think I read something that the owners of the cabin gave authorities a detailed description of the cabin layout.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Sorry I can't give a source, but I think I read something that the owners of the cabin gave authorities a detailed description of the cabin layout.

Maybe I am missing something, and I believe you, but how would that help them? The obviously had no intent to enter the building, they smashed and burned it down and you can clearly hear what I assume are cops yelling, " burn it down"

 

[Pupik]

Are you supporting Texas' and Florida's laws, that you are allowed to shoot anyone who's 'invading' your 'land' without any trial following?

We have trials for that in Florida, thank you. Please don't misquote laws you aren't fully aware nor knowledgeable of.

 

[Barra333]

Maybe I am missing something, and I believe you, but how would that help them? The obviously had no intent to enter the building, they smashed and burned it down and you can clearly hear what I assume are cops yelling, " burn it down"

At a guess - they would have worked out the most likely places in the building to hide, stockpile stuff, which windows opened to large areas, presence/absence of a basement. No one thing that would save the world, but every little bit of info would help.
If their sole plan was to burn the place down, then I don't know.

 

[G.T.Ace]

We have trials for that in Florida, thank you. Please don't misquote laws you aren't fully aware nor knowledgeable of.

All right, I apologize for Florida.

Don't know who told you that...

But if you think you can just shoot someone and the cops are just like "okay man; you're good" you're highly mistaken.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/In_Texas_can_you_shoot_someone_for_stepping_on_your_property

I've heard that police call mentioned.
No trial, no charge, nothing, just a short investigation.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but why didn't they take him alive?

How do you know that taking him alive was an option? He was, after all, armed, and was reported to be shooting at police shortly before they mounted their assault. Putting aside his history with the department and the accusations he levelled at them for the moment, just about every police force in the world will shoot back if they have an armed suspect firing at them during a stand-off.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

All right, I apolozige for Florida.


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/In_Texas_can_you_shoot_someone_for_stepping_on_your_property

I've heard that police call mentioned.
No trial, no charge, nothing, just a short investigation.

I know we're a "stand your ground state" with immunity from lawsuits from the assailant (for damages) when deadly force is justified.

I can't view that link but if I see one of the cops at school tomorrow I will ask him. Hopefully he knows, if not can put me in touch with someone who does.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Deadly force wasn't justified in this case (example) at all.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to derail this discussion.
I've just read some comments about how wrong it is, that the police shot instead of trying to take him in to custody (which I find completely stupid to even think), from people who defend this law in Texas for example. I would just like to read some more thoughts about this.

 

[Johnnypenso]

How do you know that taking him alive was an option? He was, after all, armed, and was reported to be shooting at police shortly before they mounted their assault. Putting aside his history with the department and the accusations he levelled at them for the moment, just about every police force in the world will shoot back if they have an armed suspect firing at them during a stand-off.

How can you so blatantly ignore facts? It's amazing really. You do know they didn't just shoot back right? They caved in the walls of the cabin and then set it on fire? Numerous voices on tape yelling "burn it down" It wasn't an accident that the place burned down. I'm going out on a limb here as I live in Canada and not the U.S. so I don't read or see all of your news, but is this standard practice down there? I've seen many standoffs on t.v. but I don't recall one where they destroyed the building the guy was in and set it on fire. If this is standard police procedure for an armed, barricaded suspect then I'm talking out of my a$$. My understanding is they'll sit out there for days, waiting him out, negotiating, all behind cover. Maybe lob in some teargas eventually.

Please clarify this for me.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Deadly force wasn't justified in this case (example) at all.

The suspect had a gun. He had made it known that he was going to target police officers. He had already killed two, and injured two more. He was firing at officers from the cabin shortly before the assault.

What would it take for lethal force to be justified in this case?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

How can you so blatantly ignore facts? It's amazing really.

Read my post again. I was talking in general terms:

Putting aside his history with the department and the accusations he levelled at them for the moment, just about every police force in the world will shoot back if they have an armed suspect firing at them during a stand-off.

If this was just some guy with a gun holed up in a cabin in the woods who decided to start shooting at police, then of course the police would shoot back.

I'm just saying that using extreme tactics doesn't prove that the police made no effort to take the suspect alive.

 

[Joel]

Apprehending this guy alive was a pretty low chance move. You'd have to send a bunch of guys at him with non-lethal weapons and tear gas. A police force doing this likely would be sacrificing the lives of 5+ SWAT guys to get this guy alive, and that's without accounting for how easy it would be for Dorner to just turn the gun on himself.

That being said, I'm really just at a loss for words as to how they operated. Rip the walls off the building and set it on fire? Crazy.

 

[G.T.Ace]

The suspect had a gun. He had made it known that he was going to target police officers. He had already killed two, and injured two more. He was firing at officers from the cabin shortly before the assault.

What would it take for lethal force to be justified in this case?

Ohhh, huuuuuge misunderstanding man!
I meant the case in the link. Sorry, you're of course absolutely right that deadly force was necessary at the Dorner case.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

What link? There's no link in your post.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Here: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8120385#post8120385
My other post was a direct reply to II-zOoLoGy-II.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Read my post again. I was talking in general terms:

If this was just some guy with a gun holed up in a cabin in the woods who decided to start shooting at police, then of course the police would shoot back.

I'm just saying that using extreme tactics doesn't prove that the police made no effort to take the suspect alive.

I don't recall anyone disagreeing that the police should return fire so that's a moot point. We're agreed they can return fire, they did so. Let's also agree for the sake of argument, although I'm sure many would disagree, that they made a reasonable effort to take him alive.

So now it's a standoff. All the police are undercover and don't appear in any danger. Let's assume that's true.

So what you are basically saying is, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, they've made a reasonable effort to take him alive, they have failed so now they can just kill him (that's the usual result of deadly force right?)? This is normal in a situation where there are no hostages anyone is aware of and all the police are safely behind cover? You just kill the guy?

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Deadly force wasn't justified in this case (example) at all.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to derail this discussion.
I've just read some comments about how wrong it is, that the police shot instead of trying to take him in to custody (which I find completely stupid to even think), from people who defend this law in Texas for example. I would just like to read some more thoughts about this.

Right; I was just saying in general though. If deadly force is justified by law then the person you shot/killed can't personally, by proxy, or survivor of sue you for any type of damages.

Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6.... I believe is the old saying.

Also, in that link you provided (not that its a great source) it states "after court review" for one case and for the other "Texas Supreme Court ruled" which somewhat confirms my suspicion that you are still tried for the shooting.

If you shoot someone in public with a CHL in self-defense in Texas you are still tried; you have to prove it was self defense in court. I don't see why it would be any different with trespassing, but who knows. I'll find out tomorrow.

 

[photonrider]

KCBS/KCAL
Moments ago.. . .

Dorner's Hostages Jim and Karen Reynolds: Dorner said he just wanted to clear his name. He was calm. We're very happy that we're alive.

Edit: (added) Interesting interview with the couple who looked after the rental cabin that Dorner had commandeered - it had TV, Internet.. . .
When they walked in on Dorner he made them lie on the floor and tied them up.

The couple don't usually go into the cabins - but for 'some reason' decided to inspect and do some work in the cabin. There was no forced entry into the cabin - which had been vacant for some weeks.