texanjoker wrote:Dave2 wrote:texanjoker wrote:mamabearCali wrote:Wow...if that is true they burned him alive......I don't think I like those tactics at all. Sounds like they could have gotten him alive and wanted to kill him instead. Not okay.
Are you serious? How would you expect them to get this guy alive?
According to how I'm interpreting what CNN reported, they already had him, then pushed him back in the burning cabin.
I'm having trouble believing it, really.
Once again this shows people are not paying attention and just buying what the media is saying. They then jump on the typical anti LE bandwagon before any facts are even out. Every outlet I saw during the incident said he tried to escape out the back, and found LE had the perimeter set up. There was another gun battle and he went back into the house. No where did I see a news article saying they "Pushed" him into a burning house.
Mark Furhman said it best, why not give the LE's there a break
?
They lost one during the incident, and another is critical. The one that died per a media report was married and his wife just had a baby.
There are lots of facts out, and they don't speak well of law enforcement --especially the LAPD:
1. They riddled a truck with 40 rounds, wounding an innocent woman --the truck was different than the truck Dorner was driving, and contained two women, not a big black man. The shots were from behind. If any of us did that defending our families, we'd be in prison. It smells like an assassination attempt, not a legitimate use of deadly force even if Dorner had been in the vehicle. Obviously they didn't even know who they were shooting at.
2. They rammed another vehicle, and then fired shots into it. This vehicle also did not contain a large black man, and since other officers had just cleared the vehicle to pass, it obviously was not self-defense or a legitimate use of deadly force. Neither of these two incidents can be reasonably passed off as "mistaken identity" as the LAPD is dishonestly trying to do --with a compliant media.
3. Law enforcement did it's best to keep the Dorner siege off camera. They even tried to stop an already compliant news media from tweeting reports of events. Maybe there is a legitimate reason for it, but it smells like they intended to do something that they didn't want to see the light of day.
4. The LAPD has a reputation for dirty dealing and corruption going back almost a century. Back when I was a kid in the Los Angeles area in the 50s and 60s, my very conservative pro-law enforcement father talked about how corrupt LAPD was. They were not that long ago under court supervision. Dorner made entirely credible charges of dirty dealing and corruption. Given their history you'd think they would play this situation out very transparently and carefully --they didn't. It played out more like they were desperate to get the guy and shut him up. Many many people said there was no way law enforcement would take him alive and let him see the inside of a courtroom. And maybe he wouldn't have allowed himself to be captured anyway, but law enforcement did nothing to help allay suspicions....in fact, the acted in the shadows, and keep their action off camera, when you think they'd want witnesses so their conduct couldn't be questioned.
5. Officers were recorded saying "we're going to burn him out," to "burn this ********, and "burn that ***** house down." Now, the first two comments may be compatible with calling CS canisters burners, but the "burn down" comment is not.
The LAPD doesn't deserve the benefit of any doubt --they have nearly a 100 year long history of sowing doubt and distrust. The final saga was played out in ways that arouse suspicion rather than in a transparent way that would allay suspicion, so I don't see where any benefit of the doubt is due LE there either. It may be all on the up and up, but by their own actions, they haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.
