Black Men Acting Strangely, Are they on PCP?
Lee Deante Brown.
Terry Rabb.
Two Black men, both acting strangely in two separate incidents six months apart. Both died during or after encounters with Riverside Police Department officers. Both cases under investigation by both the Riverside Police Department and the Community Police Review Commission.
One might have been mentally ill. The other was certainly physically ill. In both cases, there would be allegations that these two men either were under the influence of PCP or that officers had believed that this could be true.
On April 3, Brown was shot and killed by a Riverside Police Department officer.
Three months after his death, his family filed a wrongful death claim against the city of Riverside.
"We think the system broke down on several levels," said Brian Dunn, a Los Angeles-based lawyer who is representing Brown's family. "I have not heard anything that suggested to me that he had to be shot out there."
In fact, not much has been said about the shooting at all by the police department since it briefed the CPRC on the events leading up to and including Brown's death. What's known is that officers were called to respond to reports that Brown was walking down the street, shouting and engaging in strange behavior including lying down in the street and exposing himself to other people. The department's briefing before the CPRC provided the following narrative of the shooting.
Officer Michael Paul Stucker was monitoring his radio and drove his squad car to the Welcome Inn, at the corner of Ottawa and University Avenue. When Stucker arrived, Brown was sitting in a corner of the parking lot, near several motel rooms. Stucker got out of his vehicle and approached him after hearing from a resident that Brown might be under the influence of PCP. Stucker then issued verbal commands and when Brown did not comply, he shocked him with his department issued taser. Officer Terry Ellefson, who had SWAT training, then arrived and assisted Stucker, after telling him not to tase Brown because Ellefson was standing too close to him. Ellefson then tried to handcuff Brown and was able to place the handcuffs on one arm. Brown continued to struggle and he and the two officers moved closer to the middle of the parking lot. Ellefson tased Brown and Stucker hit him several times in the legs with the baton. After he had tased Brown, Ellefson then fired two shots at Brown from his service weapon because he alleged that Brown had grabbed his taser and he was in fear for his safety. Brown fell on the ground and later died from gunshot wounds to the chest after being transported to a local hospital.
No civilian witness who was in the vicinity reported seeing anything in Brown's hand when Ellefson shot him. One recent report came from a woman who was ironically, a mental health expert. She had been driving down University Avenue when the shooting took place. She saw Brown fall to the ground, and like other civilian witnesses, did not see anything in his hands.
Pretty quickly, it became evident that more than one individual's safety might have been endangered that day, before Ellefson fired his gun.
It turned out that Brown was not the only individual who apparently had been shocked by Ellefson's taser. Stucker also had been struck by a taser dart in his hand around the time Ellefson used his taser on Brown. As a result, he briefly lost control of his hand and arm after tens of thousands of volts of electricity ran through his body. An officer who loses his ability to control himself due to being shocked by a taser is thus placed in a dangerous and vulnerable position. He would not be able to defend himself in an altercation and thus could potentially be in fear for his safety, correct?
After all, that's the same argument that was used by the department to explain why Ellefson resorted to using lethal force against Brown. The department stated that if Brown had gained control of Ellefson's taser, then he could have used it against Ellefson, thus potentially incapacitating him and placing his life in danger. Ironically, it might have been Ellefson himself that demonstrated that scenario on his own partner.
Initially, a department representative had said that it was not clear which officer's taser was the source of the dart that had struck Stucker in the hand. However, Stucker had used his taser in the initial few minutes of his encounter with Brown and it is unlikely that he shot himself with his own taser. That only leaves one taser present at the scene that could have been responsible, which would have been Ellefson's, with one dart hitting Stucker and the other dart apparently striking Brown.
At the time Stucker was allegedly hit by one of the darts from Ellefson's taser, he was standing in close proximity to Brown, trying to grab the loose handcuff fastened to one of Brown's arms, according to the department's own version of events. Ellefson fired his taser anyway, despite having warned Stucker earlier not to fire his taser at Brown until Ellefson removed the darts from a prior usage. Ellefson likely said this because he was standing in such close proximity to Brown at the time and recognized the potential danger of that situation. Perhaps this had been part of the training he had received at some point on taser usage. It is not clear that either Stucker or Ellefson were standing at an appropriate safe distance when discharging their tasers from the information provided thus far by the police department. Witnesses said that both officers were fairly close to Brown at all times during the incident including when the tasers were discharged.
The departmental representative who provided the briefing to the CPRC never actually said that Stucker had been struck by "friendly fire" but mentioned that at some point, Stucker had felt an intense electrical shock running through his body and that there was a taser dart fastened to one of his hands. There was no explanation as to how the taser dart became attached to an officer who was not its intended target. The department representative initially attributed the electric shock felt by Stucker to Brown had grabbing his arm while he was being tased by Ellefson, during that same briefing. However, it was fairly clear to anyone who listened to the briefing what had really happened. If you feel an electric shock passing through your body and you have a taser dart sticking to any part of your body, then you probably have been tased, whether it was intentional or not.
Toxicology issues also reared their heads, with the issue of PCP intoxication in the case of Brown.
As is standard for an officer-involved death, the police department performed a toxicology screening on Brown, for alcohol and controlled substances. In this case, the test was expedited by Chief Russ Leach, a fact he relayed at a community meeting that took place two days after the shooting.
The department ran its screenings on Brown, but remain mum about the results, even though departmental representatives had brought up PCP intoxication at several community meetings as a possible reason for Brown's erratic behavior. Most likely, this conclusion had been drawn because Brown had been arrested by police officers for being under the influence of a controlled substance several days before his fatal shooting. In fact, one unidentified correspondent here claimed that it had taken seven RPD officers to get Brown inside the squad car. On the day of the shooting, one of the witnesses had allegedly told Stucker that Brown might be under the influence of PCP. Stucker's reaction to that news was to approach Brown and issue verbal commands, without waiting for any backup assistance. This, despite oft-repeated stories about individuals on PCP displaying super human strength and being nearly impervious to pain or other external stimuli. However, PCP usage has decreased markedly since the 1980s so maybe that has impacted the training the newer officers have received on apprehending individuals on PCP. At the time Stucker approached him, Brown was on the ground, behaving fairly quietly.
Despite the initial attention given to PCP, the issue of mental illness soon entered into the discussions of the shooting as well, beginning on the day that it took place. Concerned city residents and community leaders wondered out loud if it was time for the department to examine how its officers were interfacing with the mentally ill population which has grown tremendously thanks to policies and procedures put into place for deinstitutionalization of the facilities provided for the mentally ill by former President Ronald Reagan. At least, one out of every nine hospital beds is being used by a patient suffering from schizophrenia, one of several different mental illnesses and about 1/3 of the homeless population suffers from a mental illness. Increasingly, police officers are placed in the position of being the primary responders in terms of interacting with the mentally ill population.
Some of these community leaders including those with backgrounds in mental health issues took their concerns to several community forums that were held to address the shooting soon after it happened. The response from the police department's management appeared to be cautiously receptive. If the department's leadership is intelligent and visionary, then it has already taken the initial steps needed to address this serious issue that will only increase in importance over time.
However, some of the unidentified correspondents here were not buying that mental illness of any kind played a role in the Brown shooting. Last April, one "Anonymous" stated:
"Did a little more, Mary, and I'm sure you'll find out what Mr. Brown's real legacy will be - and it has nothing to do with mental illness awareness."
Correspondent "Asti Spamanti" put in his two cents on the issue of mental illness and law enforcement response as well. In prior statements, "Asti Spamanti" had identified himself as a RPD officer.
"Now as for the mentally ill, can you define that please? Does the mentally ill include those that put illegal substances into their bodies like PCP and rock cocaine-sorry Sandalou, I know you get a little peeved when people start making fun of those who use rock cocaine---Mary, I hearby proclaim that all mentally ill people should be allowed to do whatever they want including imposing threats against cops because they are mentally ill!!!!"
Disturbingly, race entered into the fray.
During the past eight months, unidentified correspondents including "Asti Spamanti", "Starksy" and others had made numerous comments about the relationship between African-Americans and illegal drug use especially crack or rock cocaine. Some unidentified individuals went further and appropriated stereotypes in their comments.
"RPD does a good job. They took the crack right out of my ass and put me in jail. Now, I'm an upstanding citizen. Mary...leave those RPD guys alone. Come see me on the corner of Douglas/University and i'll take care of your underlying problem. You need some dick.....
Sincerly Huggy Bear"
They also fabricated quotes and attributed them to famous African-Americans involving drug use to *prove* their points.
"He who smoketh the fattest rock will get the biggest high."---Rick James...
Then there are the numerous comments made by unidentified individuals about how Hispanics were "gangsters", African-Americans were "drug addicts or dealers" and the crime victims unless they were White, did not have any racial identity at all.
"Starsky"'s statement that he provided last December provided this portrait of how these individuals viewed society in a succinct fashion.
"Afterall, with all of the time spent trying to rehabilitate our youth (particularly on the East side) and all of the stipulations and politics that have created a reactive police force instead of a pro-active one, there are still a number of black males with big afros selling rock cocaine and pimpin hookers; and there are still Hispanic gangters claiming turf and shooting innocent citizens; and there are still a large number of blacks pointing guns at the faces of innocent shop owners and employees and tying them up and taking things that don't belong to them while devestating these inncocent victims for life. Yup, the more things change,the more they stay the same!!!"
"Starsky" clearly is correct in that there are indeed Hispanics in gangs and African-Americans committing crimes. However, no where in his comments does "Starsky"(or any of the other commentators, for that matter) ever talk about African-Americans in any other context besides that of being criminals. These attitudes regarding African-Americans even extended to discussion of several officers employed by the RPD. Roger "Charlie 211" Sutton and the two Black officers involved in the 1997 Lake Evans incident appeared to represent the epitome of Black officers in the RPD to several of these unidentified correspondents.
Equally apparent is how "Starsky" and others view victims of crimes as being without race. None of these commentators ever depict African-Americans or Hispanics as being crime victims, even when discussing crime in communities where members of these two racial groups make up the vast majority of the crime victims. The "innocent shop victims" and the "vendors" are not assigned racial identities, like those who victimize them are so readily in comments made here. The 10-year-old boy who was shot last Christmas also does not have a racial identity, even though he was Hispanic, although his suspected killers did.
If these individuals are indeed police officers like they have claimed to be, then how they view both perpetrators and victims along racial lines can affect how they deal with not only individuals comprising both groups, but individuals who belong to different racial groups. If an African-American man can be so readily labeled as a drug dealer or crack cocaine addict but can not just as easily be referred to as a victim or at least a person in need of assistance, how is that going to impact how an African-American man is viewed by police officers if he is suffering from a physical or mental illness that manifests itself in ways that makes him appear "crazy" or "hostile"?
After all, the fatal shooting of Tyisha Miller in 1998 originated as a 911 call for emergency medical assistance and ended with 12 bullets in her body and many more passing through her vehicle.
How many officers would look at a Black man experiencing symptoms similar to those shown by Brown or Rabb and think that he might be under the influence of an illegal drug? How many of them would still think this even after informed that he was suffering from a medical condition or a mental illness?
In November 2004, police officers fired dozens of rounds of less lethal munitions at a Black man suffering from mental illness who was trespassing on someone's roof. Fire fighters sprayed the man with their fire hoses, adding to his injuries. A version of this incident was related on this blog last November by an unidentified individual who called himself "Starsky" and claimed to be a RPD officer. Perhaps, if that incident had not been complicated by its own investigation and what it apparently uncovered, it could have been the watershed incident in terms of addressing the issue of mental illness. Unfortunately, for Rabb and Brown that would have to wait.
However, "Asti Spamanti"'s concerns about African-Americans and their drugs of choice became moot because it's still not clear whether or not Brown was even under the influence of PCP when he was shot. The police department is not making any claims either way while it conducts its own criminal investigation as well as its administrative review of that investigation. Likely, any toxicological test results(probably negative for PCP) will first be made public when the CPRC receives its briefing from its own investigator on the shooting in the upcoming months.
Unfortunately, that will make it appear as if the CPRC is detailing the facts and the department is keeping them under wraps. This is due in large part to the fact that after the department appears before the CPRC and gives the initial briefing on an officer-involved death, it closes its mouth on the matter in terms of public disclosure. In the past, it has stated that state law and the police officers' bill of rights require it to be circumspect about its inhouse investigations including officer involved deaths.
There has also been silence from the department in the public arena on whether or not it plans to implement a program geared towards dealing with individuals who are mentally ill or medically incapacitated. Some community leaders had expressed hopes that the department would adopt a program similar to DMH/SMART in Los Angeles or the renowned Memphis Police Department's program.
Southern California LE agencies' mental illness intervention programs
Memphis Police Department's CIT program
Several fatal incidents involving RPD officers and civilians in recent years have had either mental or medical conditions involved as contributory factors in terms of the behavior they exhibited that officers said left them with no alternative but to shoot them.
In November 2005, Todd Argow, a White man and a former city manager who suffered from depression, was shot and killed by Officer Terry Ellefson after he came outside of his house with an unloaded shotgun. Earlier, Argow had told one of his neighbors during a phone call that he had planned to commit "suicide by cop". The shooting was found to be in policy by the police department, a finding which will most likely be seconded by the CPRC in the next several weeks.
Mental illnesses like depression can greatly impact behavior. So can other types of medical conditions, which was apparent when examining the events leading up to the incustody death of Rabb.
Currently, the CPRC is drafting its public report for the incustody death involving Rabb. Its investigator Butch Warnberg presented his findings to the commission last week.
In October 2005, Rabb, who was a diabetic, died at a local hospital soon after he allegedly struggled with police officers who were called to assist paramedics in dealing with a "hostile" man. According to a briefing given by the police department on this incident, Rabb had been exhibiting symptoms of a diabetic episode throughout that day, culminating in the incident that led to his contact with both law enforcement and medical personnel.
Fire fighters onscene said that Rabb appeared to be in an "altered" state. They recognized his symptoms as being similar to what is seen in diabetics suffering from severe hypoglycemia, based on their statements to the CPRC's investigators. Hypoglycemic attacks can affect various bodily organs including the brain where it induces a mental state known as "hypoglycemic unawareness". Non-epileptic seizures and convulsions which can lead to unconsciousness may also occur with a severe hypoglycemic attack. Other symptoms include tremors, irritability, impaired judgment, anxiety, glassy looks, combativeness and slurred speech, all of which were exhibited by Rabb.
However, according to several witnesses, Officer Camillo Bonome made statements that indicated that he had a different theory that explained Rabb's behavior. Cathy Jones said in her interview with Warnberg that Bonome had said that he thought Rabb was on some sort of illegal drug, either crack cocaine or PCP. Hearing him say these words made her very angry with him, Jones admitted. Warnberg stated in his report that if these allegations were true, then it could have escalated the situation.
"If such statements were indeed made, they would have only served to inflame and disrupt an already chaotic scene and would have been a tactical error," Warnberg stated.
Rabb had exhibited signs that were similar to those exhibited by a person under the influence of a stimulant. However, in this particular situation, family members had informed the 911 dispatcher about Rabb's extensive medical problems, as related on the incident's CAD sheet. Fire fighters were able to identify the signs of severe hypoglycemia and were acting accordingly. Warnberg stated in his report that it appeared that the officers did not recognize Rabb's behavior as being indicative of any medical condition. In fact, he believed that the opposite might have occurred. That they may have believed that he was manifesting symptoms that were not related to any medical illness. If this is true, then it might have impacted how both officers acted in the situation. To them, was Rabb a seriously ill man or a relatively healthy drug addict?
That question is one that needed to be answered. The only problem is that apparently it was not even asked because these alleged statements made by Bonome apparently went uninvestigated.
Warnberg stated that there was no evidence whether the alleged statements were actually made by Bonome or not. What he was able to conclude is that the alleged statements were not investigated by the police department's homicide investigators assigned to the Rabb case. Even though in these cases the officers are often the last parties to be interviewed, it appeared that the detectives never asked either Bonome or Officer John Garcia about allegations that these statements had been heard by several witnesses. They never allowed them the opportunity to admit or deny making these statements, instead leaving the issue open to question. A situation which simply raises more questions.
Because the officers were dispatched to the call, current RPD policy did not require them to activate their department-issued digital audio recorders and it is not clear whether or not either officer did. The fire fighters said in their statements that they were too busy tending to Rabb to have overheard any conversations between the police officers and civilian witnesses.
Bonome did turn on his digital audio recorder after Rabb had gone into cardiac arrest, according to statement he gave to investigators. This information was provided in Warnberg's report. The reason Bonome gave for doing so was because he believed that the civilians present were upset about the incident and he wanted to protect himself from false allegations. About his use of force, Bonome stated that he and Garcia had shown a "tremendous amount of restraint" in the midst of Rabb's actions and threats, according to Warnberg's report.
The police investigators did ask both police officers about another allegation made by three civilian witnesses that one of them had hit Rabb in the face or neck with a closed fist while attempting to perform the carotid restraint. Bonome said he did not do it. Garcia said he had not done it either and that he had not seen Bonome do it, although he admitted that at one point in the altercation, he had been too busy handcuffing Rabb to see what Bonome was doing. Fire fighter Patrick Hopkins said he did not see either officer hit Rabb. At one point, Hopkins was assisting the officers in handcuffing Rabb by holding one of his arms steady, according to his interview with the CPRC's investigators.
The autopsy report for Rabb stated that there did not appear to be any bruising on his face consistent with a strike to it nor were there any obvious bruiseds or marks on his neck indicating that the cartoid restraint had been used.
According to an autopsy report submitted by the Riverside County Sheriff's/Coroner's Department, Rabb died of heart disease complicated by his diabetes and related kidney problems. Warnberg stated that Rabb's death was by cardiac arrest following his restraint by the police officer. His toxicology tests were negative for both crack and PCP, showing only the presence of THC, an ingredient found in marijuana.
Two members of Rabb's family filed claims with the city of Riverside alleging that excessive force was used against Rabb by members of both the RPD and the fire department. Claims filed in the cases of Brown and Rabb join at least one law suit filed last year involving the 2004 shooting death of Summer Lane.
The city routinely denies claims, which are often precursors to civil law suits.
Family Files Claim in Officer-Involved Shooting Death
Family files claims in Terry Rabb OID
Terry Rabb.
Two Black men, both acting strangely in two separate incidents six months apart. Both died during or after encounters with Riverside Police Department officers. Both cases under investigation by both the Riverside Police Department and the Community Police Review Commission.
One might have been mentally ill. The other was certainly physically ill. In both cases, there would be allegations that these two men either were under the influence of PCP or that officers had believed that this could be true.
On April 3, Brown was shot and killed by a Riverside Police Department officer.
Three months after his death, his family filed a wrongful death claim against the city of Riverside.
"We think the system broke down on several levels," said Brian Dunn, a Los Angeles-based lawyer who is representing Brown's family. "I have not heard anything that suggested to me that he had to be shot out there."
In fact, not much has been said about the shooting at all by the police department since it briefed the CPRC on the events leading up to and including Brown's death. What's known is that officers were called to respond to reports that Brown was walking down the street, shouting and engaging in strange behavior including lying down in the street and exposing himself to other people. The department's briefing before the CPRC provided the following narrative of the shooting.
Officer Michael Paul Stucker was monitoring his radio and drove his squad car to the Welcome Inn, at the corner of Ottawa and University Avenue. When Stucker arrived, Brown was sitting in a corner of the parking lot, near several motel rooms. Stucker got out of his vehicle and approached him after hearing from a resident that Brown might be under the influence of PCP. Stucker then issued verbal commands and when Brown did not comply, he shocked him with his department issued taser. Officer Terry Ellefson, who had SWAT training, then arrived and assisted Stucker, after telling him not to tase Brown because Ellefson was standing too close to him. Ellefson then tried to handcuff Brown and was able to place the handcuffs on one arm. Brown continued to struggle and he and the two officers moved closer to the middle of the parking lot. Ellefson tased Brown and Stucker hit him several times in the legs with the baton. After he had tased Brown, Ellefson then fired two shots at Brown from his service weapon because he alleged that Brown had grabbed his taser and he was in fear for his safety. Brown fell on the ground and later died from gunshot wounds to the chest after being transported to a local hospital.
No civilian witness who was in the vicinity reported seeing anything in Brown's hand when Ellefson shot him. One recent report came from a woman who was ironically, a mental health expert. She had been driving down University Avenue when the shooting took place. She saw Brown fall to the ground, and like other civilian witnesses, did not see anything in his hands.
Pretty quickly, it became evident that more than one individual's safety might have been endangered that day, before Ellefson fired his gun.
It turned out that Brown was not the only individual who apparently had been shocked by Ellefson's taser. Stucker also had been struck by a taser dart in his hand around the time Ellefson used his taser on Brown. As a result, he briefly lost control of his hand and arm after tens of thousands of volts of electricity ran through his body. An officer who loses his ability to control himself due to being shocked by a taser is thus placed in a dangerous and vulnerable position. He would not be able to defend himself in an altercation and thus could potentially be in fear for his safety, correct?
After all, that's the same argument that was used by the department to explain why Ellefson resorted to using lethal force against Brown. The department stated that if Brown had gained control of Ellefson's taser, then he could have used it against Ellefson, thus potentially incapacitating him and placing his life in danger. Ironically, it might have been Ellefson himself that demonstrated that scenario on his own partner.
Initially, a department representative had said that it was not clear which officer's taser was the source of the dart that had struck Stucker in the hand. However, Stucker had used his taser in the initial few minutes of his encounter with Brown and it is unlikely that he shot himself with his own taser. That only leaves one taser present at the scene that could have been responsible, which would have been Ellefson's, with one dart hitting Stucker and the other dart apparently striking Brown.
At the time Stucker was allegedly hit by one of the darts from Ellefson's taser, he was standing in close proximity to Brown, trying to grab the loose handcuff fastened to one of Brown's arms, according to the department's own version of events. Ellefson fired his taser anyway, despite having warned Stucker earlier not to fire his taser at Brown until Ellefson removed the darts from a prior usage. Ellefson likely said this because he was standing in such close proximity to Brown at the time and recognized the potential danger of that situation. Perhaps this had been part of the training he had received at some point on taser usage. It is not clear that either Stucker or Ellefson were standing at an appropriate safe distance when discharging their tasers from the information provided thus far by the police department. Witnesses said that both officers were fairly close to Brown at all times during the incident including when the tasers were discharged.
The departmental representative who provided the briefing to the CPRC never actually said that Stucker had been struck by "friendly fire" but mentioned that at some point, Stucker had felt an intense electrical shock running through his body and that there was a taser dart fastened to one of his hands. There was no explanation as to how the taser dart became attached to an officer who was not its intended target. The department representative initially attributed the electric shock felt by Stucker to Brown had grabbing his arm while he was being tased by Ellefson, during that same briefing. However, it was fairly clear to anyone who listened to the briefing what had really happened. If you feel an electric shock passing through your body and you have a taser dart sticking to any part of your body, then you probably have been tased, whether it was intentional or not.
Toxicology issues also reared their heads, with the issue of PCP intoxication in the case of Brown.
As is standard for an officer-involved death, the police department performed a toxicology screening on Brown, for alcohol and controlled substances. In this case, the test was expedited by Chief Russ Leach, a fact he relayed at a community meeting that took place two days after the shooting.
The department ran its screenings on Brown, but remain mum about the results, even though departmental representatives had brought up PCP intoxication at several community meetings as a possible reason for Brown's erratic behavior. Most likely, this conclusion had been drawn because Brown had been arrested by police officers for being under the influence of a controlled substance several days before his fatal shooting. In fact, one unidentified correspondent here claimed that it had taken seven RPD officers to get Brown inside the squad car. On the day of the shooting, one of the witnesses had allegedly told Stucker that Brown might be under the influence of PCP. Stucker's reaction to that news was to approach Brown and issue verbal commands, without waiting for any backup assistance. This, despite oft-repeated stories about individuals on PCP displaying super human strength and being nearly impervious to pain or other external stimuli. However, PCP usage has decreased markedly since the 1980s so maybe that has impacted the training the newer officers have received on apprehending individuals on PCP. At the time Stucker approached him, Brown was on the ground, behaving fairly quietly.
Despite the initial attention given to PCP, the issue of mental illness soon entered into the discussions of the shooting as well, beginning on the day that it took place. Concerned city residents and community leaders wondered out loud if it was time for the department to examine how its officers were interfacing with the mentally ill population which has grown tremendously thanks to policies and procedures put into place for deinstitutionalization of the facilities provided for the mentally ill by former President Ronald Reagan. At least, one out of every nine hospital beds is being used by a patient suffering from schizophrenia, one of several different mental illnesses and about 1/3 of the homeless population suffers from a mental illness. Increasingly, police officers are placed in the position of being the primary responders in terms of interacting with the mentally ill population.
Some of these community leaders including those with backgrounds in mental health issues took their concerns to several community forums that were held to address the shooting soon after it happened. The response from the police department's management appeared to be cautiously receptive. If the department's leadership is intelligent and visionary, then it has already taken the initial steps needed to address this serious issue that will only increase in importance over time.
However, some of the unidentified correspondents here were not buying that mental illness of any kind played a role in the Brown shooting. Last April, one "Anonymous" stated:
"Did a little more, Mary, and I'm sure you'll find out what Mr. Brown's real legacy will be - and it has nothing to do with mental illness awareness."
Correspondent "Asti Spamanti" put in his two cents on the issue of mental illness and law enforcement response as well. In prior statements, "Asti Spamanti" had identified himself as a RPD officer.
"Now as for the mentally ill, can you define that please? Does the mentally ill include those that put illegal substances into their bodies like PCP and rock cocaine-sorry Sandalou, I know you get a little peeved when people start making fun of those who use rock cocaine---Mary, I hearby proclaim that all mentally ill people should be allowed to do whatever they want including imposing threats against cops because they are mentally ill!!!!"
Disturbingly, race entered into the fray.
During the past eight months, unidentified correspondents including "Asti Spamanti", "Starksy" and others had made numerous comments about the relationship between African-Americans and illegal drug use especially crack or rock cocaine. Some unidentified individuals went further and appropriated stereotypes in their comments.
"RPD does a good job. They took the crack right out of my ass and put me in jail. Now, I'm an upstanding citizen. Mary...leave those RPD guys alone. Come see me on the corner of Douglas/University and i'll take care of your underlying problem. You need some dick.....
Sincerly Huggy Bear"
They also fabricated quotes and attributed them to famous African-Americans involving drug use to *prove* their points.
"He who smoketh the fattest rock will get the biggest high."---Rick James...
Then there are the numerous comments made by unidentified individuals about how Hispanics were "gangsters", African-Americans were "drug addicts or dealers" and the crime victims unless they were White, did not have any racial identity at all.
"Starsky"'s statement that he provided last December provided this portrait of how these individuals viewed society in a succinct fashion.
"Afterall, with all of the time spent trying to rehabilitate our youth (particularly on the East side) and all of the stipulations and politics that have created a reactive police force instead of a pro-active one, there are still a number of black males with big afros selling rock cocaine and pimpin hookers; and there are still Hispanic gangters claiming turf and shooting innocent citizens; and there are still a large number of blacks pointing guns at the faces of innocent shop owners and employees and tying them up and taking things that don't belong to them while devestating these inncocent victims for life. Yup, the more things change,the more they stay the same!!!"
"Starsky" clearly is correct in that there are indeed Hispanics in gangs and African-Americans committing crimes. However, no where in his comments does "Starsky"(or any of the other commentators, for that matter) ever talk about African-Americans in any other context besides that of being criminals. These attitudes regarding African-Americans even extended to discussion of several officers employed by the RPD. Roger "Charlie 211" Sutton and the two Black officers involved in the 1997 Lake Evans incident appeared to represent the epitome of Black officers in the RPD to several of these unidentified correspondents.
Equally apparent is how "Starsky" and others view victims of crimes as being without race. None of these commentators ever depict African-Americans or Hispanics as being crime victims, even when discussing crime in communities where members of these two racial groups make up the vast majority of the crime victims. The "innocent shop victims" and the "vendors" are not assigned racial identities, like those who victimize them are so readily in comments made here. The 10-year-old boy who was shot last Christmas also does not have a racial identity, even though he was Hispanic, although his suspected killers did.
If these individuals are indeed police officers like they have claimed to be, then how they view both perpetrators and victims along racial lines can affect how they deal with not only individuals comprising both groups, but individuals who belong to different racial groups. If an African-American man can be so readily labeled as a drug dealer or crack cocaine addict but can not just as easily be referred to as a victim or at least a person in need of assistance, how is that going to impact how an African-American man is viewed by police officers if he is suffering from a physical or mental illness that manifests itself in ways that makes him appear "crazy" or "hostile"?
After all, the fatal shooting of Tyisha Miller in 1998 originated as a 911 call for emergency medical assistance and ended with 12 bullets in her body and many more passing through her vehicle.
How many officers would look at a Black man experiencing symptoms similar to those shown by Brown or Rabb and think that he might be under the influence of an illegal drug? How many of them would still think this even after informed that he was suffering from a medical condition or a mental illness?
In November 2004, police officers fired dozens of rounds of less lethal munitions at a Black man suffering from mental illness who was trespassing on someone's roof. Fire fighters sprayed the man with their fire hoses, adding to his injuries. A version of this incident was related on this blog last November by an unidentified individual who called himself "Starsky" and claimed to be a RPD officer. Perhaps, if that incident had not been complicated by its own investigation and what it apparently uncovered, it could have been the watershed incident in terms of addressing the issue of mental illness. Unfortunately, for Rabb and Brown that would have to wait.
However, "Asti Spamanti"'s concerns about African-Americans and their drugs of choice became moot because it's still not clear whether or not Brown was even under the influence of PCP when he was shot. The police department is not making any claims either way while it conducts its own criminal investigation as well as its administrative review of that investigation. Likely, any toxicological test results(probably negative for PCP) will first be made public when the CPRC receives its briefing from its own investigator on the shooting in the upcoming months.
Unfortunately, that will make it appear as if the CPRC is detailing the facts and the department is keeping them under wraps. This is due in large part to the fact that after the department appears before the CPRC and gives the initial briefing on an officer-involved death, it closes its mouth on the matter in terms of public disclosure. In the past, it has stated that state law and the police officers' bill of rights require it to be circumspect about its inhouse investigations including officer involved deaths.
There has also been silence from the department in the public arena on whether or not it plans to implement a program geared towards dealing with individuals who are mentally ill or medically incapacitated. Some community leaders had expressed hopes that the department would adopt a program similar to DMH/SMART in Los Angeles or the renowned Memphis Police Department's program.
Southern California LE agencies' mental illness intervention programs
Memphis Police Department's CIT program
Several fatal incidents involving RPD officers and civilians in recent years have had either mental or medical conditions involved as contributory factors in terms of the behavior they exhibited that officers said left them with no alternative but to shoot them.
In November 2005, Todd Argow, a White man and a former city manager who suffered from depression, was shot and killed by Officer Terry Ellefson after he came outside of his house with an unloaded shotgun. Earlier, Argow had told one of his neighbors during a phone call that he had planned to commit "suicide by cop". The shooting was found to be in policy by the police department, a finding which will most likely be seconded by the CPRC in the next several weeks.
Mental illnesses like depression can greatly impact behavior. So can other types of medical conditions, which was apparent when examining the events leading up to the incustody death of Rabb.
Currently, the CPRC is drafting its public report for the incustody death involving Rabb. Its investigator Butch Warnberg presented his findings to the commission last week.
In October 2005, Rabb, who was a diabetic, died at a local hospital soon after he allegedly struggled with police officers who were called to assist paramedics in dealing with a "hostile" man. According to a briefing given by the police department on this incident, Rabb had been exhibiting symptoms of a diabetic episode throughout that day, culminating in the incident that led to his contact with both law enforcement and medical personnel.
Fire fighters onscene said that Rabb appeared to be in an "altered" state. They recognized his symptoms as being similar to what is seen in diabetics suffering from severe hypoglycemia, based on their statements to the CPRC's investigators. Hypoglycemic attacks can affect various bodily organs including the brain where it induces a mental state known as "hypoglycemic unawareness". Non-epileptic seizures and convulsions which can lead to unconsciousness may also occur with a severe hypoglycemic attack. Other symptoms include tremors, irritability, impaired judgment, anxiety, glassy looks, combativeness and slurred speech, all of which were exhibited by Rabb.
However, according to several witnesses, Officer Camillo Bonome made statements that indicated that he had a different theory that explained Rabb's behavior. Cathy Jones said in her interview with Warnberg that Bonome had said that he thought Rabb was on some sort of illegal drug, either crack cocaine or PCP. Hearing him say these words made her very angry with him, Jones admitted. Warnberg stated in his report that if these allegations were true, then it could have escalated the situation.
"If such statements were indeed made, they would have only served to inflame and disrupt an already chaotic scene and would have been a tactical error," Warnberg stated.
Rabb had exhibited signs that were similar to those exhibited by a person under the influence of a stimulant. However, in this particular situation, family members had informed the 911 dispatcher about Rabb's extensive medical problems, as related on the incident's CAD sheet. Fire fighters were able to identify the signs of severe hypoglycemia and were acting accordingly. Warnberg stated in his report that it appeared that the officers did not recognize Rabb's behavior as being indicative of any medical condition. In fact, he believed that the opposite might have occurred. That they may have believed that he was manifesting symptoms that were not related to any medical illness. If this is true, then it might have impacted how both officers acted in the situation. To them, was Rabb a seriously ill man or a relatively healthy drug addict?
That question is one that needed to be answered. The only problem is that apparently it was not even asked because these alleged statements made by Bonome apparently went uninvestigated.
Warnberg stated that there was no evidence whether the alleged statements were actually made by Bonome or not. What he was able to conclude is that the alleged statements were not investigated by the police department's homicide investigators assigned to the Rabb case. Even though in these cases the officers are often the last parties to be interviewed, it appeared that the detectives never asked either Bonome or Officer John Garcia about allegations that these statements had been heard by several witnesses. They never allowed them the opportunity to admit or deny making these statements, instead leaving the issue open to question. A situation which simply raises more questions.
Because the officers were dispatched to the call, current RPD policy did not require them to activate their department-issued digital audio recorders and it is not clear whether or not either officer did. The fire fighters said in their statements that they were too busy tending to Rabb to have overheard any conversations between the police officers and civilian witnesses.
Bonome did turn on his digital audio recorder after Rabb had gone into cardiac arrest, according to statement he gave to investigators. This information was provided in Warnberg's report. The reason Bonome gave for doing so was because he believed that the civilians present were upset about the incident and he wanted to protect himself from false allegations. About his use of force, Bonome stated that he and Garcia had shown a "tremendous amount of restraint" in the midst of Rabb's actions and threats, according to Warnberg's report.
The police investigators did ask both police officers about another allegation made by three civilian witnesses that one of them had hit Rabb in the face or neck with a closed fist while attempting to perform the carotid restraint. Bonome said he did not do it. Garcia said he had not done it either and that he had not seen Bonome do it, although he admitted that at one point in the altercation, he had been too busy handcuffing Rabb to see what Bonome was doing. Fire fighter Patrick Hopkins said he did not see either officer hit Rabb. At one point, Hopkins was assisting the officers in handcuffing Rabb by holding one of his arms steady, according to his interview with the CPRC's investigators.
The autopsy report for Rabb stated that there did not appear to be any bruising on his face consistent with a strike to it nor were there any obvious bruiseds or marks on his neck indicating that the cartoid restraint had been used.
According to an autopsy report submitted by the Riverside County Sheriff's/Coroner's Department, Rabb died of heart disease complicated by his diabetes and related kidney problems. Warnberg stated that Rabb's death was by cardiac arrest following his restraint by the police officer. His toxicology tests were negative for both crack and PCP, showing only the presence of THC, an ingredient found in marijuana.
Two members of Rabb's family filed claims with the city of Riverside alleging that excessive force was used against Rabb by members of both the RPD and the fire department. Claims filed in the cases of Brown and Rabb join at least one law suit filed last year involving the 2004 shooting death of Summer Lane.
The city routinely denies claims, which are often precursors to civil law suits.
Family Files Claim in Officer-Involved Shooting Death
Family files claims in Terry Rabb OID
posted by Five Before Midnight | 11:58 AM
15 Comments:
Mental illnesses like depression can greatly impact behavior.
No shit, Sherlock.
Dear Anonymous:
Yes, on its face it seems like an obvious statement to be made, but in reality, it's not always so obvious, is it?
Have a good day,
Dear Sandalou:
When I listened to the briefing done by the CPRC's investigator, I couldn't help but remember some of the postings made here whether it makes sense to do so or not because their authors are still unknown.
I can't say that I really miss them. I especially do not miss any "Anonymous" individuals who made disgusting, racist, sexist and nasty comments. Perhaps these people stopped posting because I did not give them the response they wanted or they just wore themselves out with their vitriol and the emotions that fueled it. Bullies, cyber and otherwise, do not like it when people stand up to them and call them on their behavior. They want you to be weak and frightened, but it is they who are frightened, pathetic and weak. I think anyone with any intelligence reading this site would understand that these individuals are what they are, cowards.
Some of these nasty comments appeared to have been made not by law enforcement officers so much, as wannabes. People who perhaps hang on the fringes of the profession but will never be a part of it themselves because the profession requires enough sanity to at least get through the background checks and psychological evaluations, good writing skills(which were lacking in quite a few posts here) and the realization that the badge, the gun and the power that come with them are not separate from the hard work and accountability issues attached to the profession. They certainly did not seem to know much about what it entails even while *speaking* for police officers and FTMP, their writing skills were poorer than were those shown by those who identified themselves using aliases. They appear aware of their failings but remain in denial about their own complicity in them.
When it comes to physical appearance, wardrobe and bodily hygiene, did any of these individuals post photographs of themselves here to serve as standards of comparison? Of course not, and I dare say if they did, perhaps they would not be ones to insult other people. But it is the hallmark of a childish, insecure, malicious person to insult people on the basis of their personal appearance. Individuals who do so need to grow up and realize that they can't spend the rest of their lives behaving like they are still in junior high school. Eventually, it is time to become and behave like an adult.
As for "Serpico", "DJ" and "Starsky" and their respective assorted aliases, if they were indeed RPD officers, they are probably still complaining amongst themselves as they probably did before coming here. This site appeared to serve mainly as an outlet for them to vent in because they may have felt adrift in a sea of changes. I'm sure there is still a wall of silence around these individuals if they are in law enforcement.
Even though several of those using aliases stated that they loved their jobs and were happy performing them, they still appeared quite miserable to me. That's very unfortunate, because they should be excited by all the changes that have occurred in the police department the past several years. Maybe if they stopped fighting progress, they would be surprised that their attitudes might change.
Have a nice day,
and Mary Shelton got picked on for her personal appearance in junior high as today. Realizing that she could do nothing about her deplorable physical attributes, Mary chose to concentrate on her academics. Mary's lack of social skills and chronic mental illness limit her ability to transfer her academics into real life experience.
Dear "Anonymous":
Hi wannabe. I see you have categorized yourself, through your comments.
As for my "deplorable looks", thanks for stating that! I would be upset if a man of your obvious ilk found me attractive. I guess that leaves you with your dream girls, Ann Coulter. She's obviously perfect for you because she will never be able to disappoint you or even worse, reject you. Of course, you admire her intelligence and wit. After all, she can never talk back to you.
While we are on the subject of physical appearance, what do you look like? What if it is you, who looks unkempt, unshaven, poorly dressed and is only occasionally acquainted with a toothbrush, a wash cloth, let alone a shower? I mean, do you smell? You do seem preoccupied with these things to the point of using them to insult other people. But what about yourself? People who insult others on the basis of their personal appearance usually have some insecurities in that area themselves and/or they define themselves solely by their physical appearance and how it stacks against that of other people.
What about your social skills, because from what I've read here, it does appear that yours need some work. As for mental illness, I would guess that you do not suffer from any such condition(with the possible exception of antisocial personality disorder), just a bad case of immaturity, insecurity, petulance and self-pity wrapped up in a tendency to lash out at other people to make up for your own shortcomings. You punish those who reject you in any way or tell you to leave them alone. You probably do this in real life as well, if your behavior here is any indication. You probably have little respect for personal boundaries that other people create to keep people like you out. You mask that lack of respect for others by claiming that you engage in offensive actions for "my own amusement" or "free speech".
I wouldn't be surprised if you haven't had at least one temporary restraining order filed against you, if your behavior here is any indication at all of what you are like in real life. Maybe, you've even been called a stalker by someone else or accused of stalking another person. Again, if your behavior here is any indication, that would not surprise me in the least.
I'm asking these questions about your physical appearance, because you appear to be the champion of reversals in your comments here. Not that it would matter, because physical appearance is often not the best way to judge a person. It takes a very shallow and mean-spirited person to insult another person in that way, especially for your own amusement. Actually, that is what sociopaths do. At least if they are men or women past high school age.
For all I know, you may be nice to look at, wear designer clothing and smell like cologne. All attributes considered attractive and desirable by society. You could be gainfully employed. But it wouldn't matter because no amount of beauty, attractive odor nor a good wardrobe could hide the ugliness that resides in your soul. You can't put perfume on poop.
I would be surprised if you were in a personal relationship or had ever been in one. Women tend to shy away from overt misogynists who view them as objects to just lie on and (insert four symbols of choice, for "fuck"), unless they are paid by the hour and those women would most likely rather do anything else. Even if you are good-looking, that will only delay the inevitable for you. Any woman will leave you, given enough time to find out what you are really like inside. Perhaps women have already. Perhaps the internet is your one outlet in which to punish them for rejecting you.
Good Day,
You can put perfume on poop.
That happens when someone spits on you.
Dear Sandalou:
I'm pretty sure I did not run into "Anonymous" in junior high. If our paths have crossed, it was probably much later.
Despite my revulsion at the sewage spewed by "Anonymous" here, I do chuckle when he derides feminism, or as he calls it, feminist lesbianist socialism or the godless feminism something or some other silly term. It's pretty clear what impact feminist application and theory has had on his life, based on his words here!
The only thing sillier was if he was the one who made that comment comparing the "creator" with "natural selection" apparently totally unaware that the two terms are not only mutually exclusive, but have been philosophically on a collision course for the past several hundred years. It certainly was not funny at all when that comment was made, but looking back with some perspective, if he wrote it, it simply displays his ignorance right along with his maliciousness.
Perhaps he was once a kind and decent person in the past that did good things, but now, I doubt anyone would consider him such if this is how he behaves in real life. People probably stay away from him and he probably blames them for that too.
Have a nice day,
Dear "Anonymous":
Ouch. Surprise, another reversal. I'm not surprised you gravitated to the fecal reference.
You see I'm not nearly as good at this as you are. I have not had the practice that you clearly have had and unlike you, I have no desire to be nasty, let alone become an expert at it. I would almost feel pity for you, if I did not find your behavior so repulsive and very mean-spirited.
By the way, you can take that statement and use it to achieve your next orgasm. After all, it's Saturday night so go knock yourself out. Pity, that's how you get off by intimidating women.
You should really think about getting psychological help. I'd even pray for you, not that I think it will do much good and my motives are purely selfish. I'm not concerned about you at all. I'm concerned about other women on and off the internet who cross paths with you.
and with Ms. Shelton's brilliant and extensive research in human behavior, scholastic achievement, and diverse political support base; Ms. Shelton was hired as senior research consultant for the Bill and Melinda Gates scholastic achievement research center. Ms. Shelton was chosen overall among five hundred candidate applicatants nationwide. The position's annual salary is $200,000. Ms. Shelton's outstanding resume was by far the " most impressive among all applicants ", Mr. Gates was quoted as saying.
N O T !
Dear Sandalou:
Thank you for your comments.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on one point Mary. There is a lot of evidence of mental illness on the Nonys part. Unreasoning hatred of other people is a definite sign of mental instability for one. Their inability to deal with/handle women as real people rather than objects. The inability to stop themselves from spewing twisted filth here despite the obvious knowledge that what they are doing and saying is unacceptable by the standards of the society they live in. Self destruction can never be considered healthy.
You may be right on the issue of mental illness, but I think of these types of behaviors as more closely resembling personality disorders especially borderline disorder or antisocial/sociopathic disorder rather than a manifestation of psychotic illnesses. I believe several of these individuals know the difference between right and wrong behavior but do not believe the rules of society apply to them. This "Anonymous" epitomizes that mind set in the behavior that he has shown here. The fact is that even though he fully understands what he is doing and how disgusting it is, he defends it by claiming that he is posting for his own amusement. This rationalization would support the assertion that he has antisocial personality disorder with a strong sadistic streak, which is a dangerous combination. Yes, his behavior and perhaps that of other unidentified individuals may be illegal but why should they care, if they are sociopathic? The rules of society and the laws do not apply to them.
According to experts, the typical cyber bully does not care about the legalities of his(and most of them are men) behavior because most likely they believe that they are above them and that their behavior is protected by the U.S. Constitution. This current individual's argument regarding his behavior is that it's free speech, but it's not considered protected speech.
I have been harassed, intimidated, threatened as you say with implied violence disguised as "free speech" and even subjected to a rather bizarre blackmail attempt regarding my federal income tax returns because one unidentified individual apparently believed I was on some form of public assistance. Blackmail or extortion is a felony crime, whether or not the person committing it is operating under an accurate assumption or not. The only way to respond to a threat from a thug like that is to tell that thug that you refuse to be intimidated, which I did.
I never thought I could see so many(or at least it seemed) crazy characters in one place.
Here are a few of them, all unidentified of course because if they made their true names known, they would not be able to behave so badly, being cowards and all.
"Anonymous" here shared his belief that I had some rape fantasy involving police officers, which he described in great detail. Of course, if he was the same individual who claimed I was either an asexual woman or a lesbian, he might just be indecisive in his choice of insults to throw out at women who reject his crude and offensive attempts at getting attention. Then again, if any city ever hired this degenerate to be a police officer, they might eventually get complaints from the local prostitutes similar to those received in current cases involving Riverside County Sheriff Department deputies.
He definitely does not sound like he's in law enforcement or with the RPD. He sounds like the ultimate wannabe who knows deep down he will never make the grade because for one thing, he's probably sitting on his ass waiting for it to be given to him rather than getting off his ass, going out and getting it. However, it is just as well, because he would probably never make it anyway, given that he has serious mental issues like you stated. Any prior history of temporary restraining orders, if he indeed has any, would also preclude him from being hired to work in this profession or even in any position inside a law enforcement agency. So would a spotty job history, including terminations of employment from prior jobs. Someone who behaves in this fashion is either not employed himself or at the very least, has probably been fired from at least one job, possibly by a female employer. If he has ever worked for a female employer, he has probably hated it and her because remember, women are seen by this individuals as objects to lie there while he fucks them. If he was fired by a female employer, perhaps he tried to make her feel uncomfortable or even unsafe afterwards.
If he was terminated from any prior employment, it was probably due to anger and control issues that likely have been part and parcel of his existence. If he was ever terminated, he probably cried and whined that he was actually the victim of some grave injustice against him because he's clearly shown he is either unable or unwilling to not only be responsible for his own behavior but also to be held accountable for it. Like every setback that has occurred in his miserable life(and make no mistake, he sounds very miserable), it's always someone else's fault. If someone else claims he has done something to them, that person is a liar, even as the list of "liars" grows. He bolsters his own insults and slurs by claiming that other people including those in positions of influence and power including "public officials" are his sources, when the truth is, these same individuals probably have no clue that not only does this person exist, but that he is using them for his purposes.
He clearly hates and resents feminism, longing for the days when women were just objects lying supine to (insert four symbols of choice for "fuck"). Now that more women assert themselves and talk back , he feels threatened by any challenge to his innate authority as a man, because after all, he defines his manhood through his attempts to control and denigrate women. It's likely this person is not in a personal relationship with a woman, nor has he been in one for a long time if ever.
This portrait was painted through his own comments here as well as stalker profiles provided by various organizations. It's probably very accurate.
Moving on to some of the others.
One or more people made racial slurs and used black face in comments. That sounds like behavior done by very immature individuals, perhaps very young in age or suffering from a serious case of stunted emotional development. Those comments were the equivalent of a child doing something of shock value to get attention from a parent. Most likely, these individuals were not police officers from any agency, let alone the RPD. Hopefully, those individuals will go back under their rocks and stay there.
One unidentified poster got upset with an inquiry I made of another poster about the military and after warning others not to answer questions lest they identify themselves, went off on some bizarre tirade about his willingness to kill for the Second Amendment, then stated that when the "time was right", there was some list and it would be checked twice, whatever that means. I assume he was not talking about his grocery list.
If this guy were an officer(one would hope not), it might be wise for his supervisor to keep a close eye on him so he does not go off on a rampage some day when his internal time clock tells him it's "time". He could also be some unstable individual out there on the internet who is simply trying to rustle up votes for his NRA chapter's board of directors election, though the NRA usually shies away from such insane rhetoric by its members. Perhaps he is currently in the military, or used to be in the past, either in the active forces, reserves or national guard. Perhaps he simply plays violent video games and has grown to believe that actually counts as military experience.
Then we have the two to three unidentified individuals who shared a yen for violent porn, including the one who does not like to wash his hands and apparently buys keyboards in bulk by the crate. Like "Anonymous" here, he probably has a closet filled with violent porn that he crawls into whenever he feels insecure about his manhood.
There was also that very strange unidentified individual who claimed that waving a gun around "chicks" and doing something with his handcuffs would draw flocks of women to him. My guess, is that his dates consist of either women of the vinyl kind or that he has to coerce or pay some poor woman to be turned on while he indulges his police fantasies. He is potentially dangerous to other women, because in a sense, this could be a rape fantasy or he could be describing behavior he has already done.
That comment included a reference about "common urban savage" that also appeared in a comment made earlier by a poster named "truly anonymous" which was a strange moniker to use and implies that this person wasn't as "new to the site" as he or she claimed. Of course, he or she is also unidentified(because cowardice is apparently contagious), but maybe like "Anonymous", he or she has a fantasy about being a police officer but also lacks the sanity to get through the hiring process.
A couple individuals also appeared, identifying themselves as RPD officers(whether they are or not) and presented laundry lists of grievances about that department, similar to what happened last autumn. One of them claimed that I had trivialized every point he had made and that his audio or video recorder would get him killed and there were not any city jails to lock up homeless people, day laborers and prostitutes in. Apparently, he's no fan of community policing, which is what is supposed to be the hallmark of the new RPD. He or she did raise some issues that are worth looking into but FTMP, he or she seemed to be most upset that mechanisms to both increase the accountability of and protect officers in the RPD had been imposed on them. One guy posted his resume on the site and came up with an unusual way to handle employee burnout.
One unidentified individual waxed on about porn and prime rib and whined that his or her boss's bosses told him not to post on the site because even though they all agreed it was hilariously funny, the real world(in a matter of speaking) would view them in a unflattering light. He or she was never able to explain the disconnect between the fact that they thought it was hilarious and everyone else would apparently look at them in a bad light because of that.
"Innocent Bystander" who had apparently dropped by here last autumn basically divulged information in his or her posts this time around about these officers, if indeed this unidentified person's information is to be believed. I noticed that his or her inside information about the city's rush to give the RPOA a raise has not panned out nor has the apparent "bleeding" from the vein of the pool of newer officers appeared to taken place because according to the department, its vacancy rate is its lowest in years. Currently, the information about the experience level of these officers who are upset, provided by "Innocent Bystander" stands at 50/50 so chalk that information up to being less than accurate as well. "Innocent Bystander" apparently left not long after the whole blackmail thing, good riddance to bad rubbish.
What a bizarre group of people. They could keep a staff of behavioral psychologists rolling in clover for years just by having each one of them lie on the couch or examine Rorschach pictures. We all know what images the majority of them would see within those pictures, given the vein of many of the comments posted here.
Did I leave anyone out? Oh yeah, there is the silent audience of gawkers including perhaps, employees of the RPD who are reading this and getting their rocks off as well. Maybe by themselves locked in the closet with their computers or perhaps they are not alone. I would not guess that there are very many of them were amusing themselves this way, because most of the officers in the RPD are good officers.
Last but not least, there was that strange appearance by either a retired RPD lieutenant or someone claiming to be him. It's hard to know what to think about a former RPD supervisor who would post out of the blue and ask a question on behalf of "us" which was then followed by another unidentified person repeating his question. But he was very articulate. I would have liked to ask him why the department assigned him to an I.A. investigation to investigate the racial discrimination claims made by a Black RPD officer within one year of him filing a reverse race and gender discrimination claim of his own against the city, contesting the promotions of several men of color and a White woman. That seems a bit odd and like a conflict of interest to me.
Quite a few people scratched their heads over that one. Some people find it difficult to believe it was him. Others were not so surprised, if it was him.
This aside, I do consider my safety, and have for nearly a year, as I had even before this happened. But it's the internet, and there is no way to tell where the danger is coming from. I do know how to take care of myself very well.
Have a nice day,
Dear Sandalou:
Last but not least although you seem to be able to brush them off, the threats of physical and sexual violence made towards you here are definitive proof of mental deficiencies, not to mention illegal. While chances are none of them are psycholocilly healthy enough to be in uniform, there are several who shouldn't be at large at all due to the dangers they represent to large segments of society.
I do agree that there are some very mentally unstable individuals posting here. I do worry about harm to myself or to other women, given the sick, twisted comments I've read here especially those pertaining to implied violence against myself and other women. Even if this were free speech, it would be squandering this right in my opinion and desecrating it. That's a shame that there are men out there who hate women so much and love telling them so, but it's their choice to engage in this behavior.
However, I'm a realist and the fact is that men of this ilk can behave like this and get away with it and love every minute of it. They do it all the time and who knows, this individual for example, may have done this before. It's difficult to deal with an enemy you can't see, because you do not know where to look for them. But I have been doing some research.
I've talked to some individuals and was directed to several sites devoted to educating people on the issue of cyberstalking. After reading the information, I realized that quite a bit of the behavior shown in the comments posted here fit the definition. I did not realize that this behavior existed and that there was a name for it. I also read the symptoms experienced by those who are targeted by individuals who engage in this behavior and I've had every single one, often all at the same time in the past 10 months, due to several comments made last autumn and quite a few of them made more recently. I've had problems eating and sleeping, have lost 20 pounds and have had nightmares. Although it's not the same intensity of what I felt when I was a crime victim, the feelings are the same.
Women are much more vulnerable than men to stalking on the internet, usually by men they have known personally but not always. It's a new problem which has sprung up with the development of technology. This "Anonymous" individual's behavior fits that definition fairly closely. In fact, one person told me after reading what this individual and possibly others wrote, that it was a very bad case of it, because of all the comments involving physical and sexual violence as well as the blackmail threat made by the same or another unidentified individual.
People may laugh, but this has been difficult on me and my family. My mother was very stressed when the first news article appeared in print. I have not told her about the latest postings, because it would upset her too much. I really do not want her to read the derogatory comments made against her simply for being my mother. See, these cowards can not even stick to demeaning or intimidating the individual they hate. They have to do like to their family members, not to mention individuals who "pray" that violent harm comes to them. Still, you can not let individuals of this ilk intimidate you from living your life, simply because they are unhappy with what you do with it. Unfortunately, often, it's a sign that you are doing some good and you have to keep doing it.
Information on Cyberstalking:
Cyberstalking
Addressing Cyberstalking
Who cyberstalks?
excerpt:
Cyberstalkers are often driven by revenge, hate, anger, jealousy, obsession and mental illness. While a cyberharasser may be motivated by some of these same feelings, often the harassment is driven by the desire to frighten or embarrass the harassment victim. Sometimes the harasser intends to teach the victim a lesson in netiquette or political correctness (from the harasser’s point of view). Often the cyberharassment victim is merely in the wrong place at the wrong time, or has made a comment or expressed an opinion that the cyberharasser dislikes. We have even seen cases where the victim is merely being targeted because they are the first ones the cyberharasser encounters when they are in a “bad mood. Cyberstalkers/harassers frequently follow their victims into chat rooms and onto discussion boards, posting lies and hateful messages, or passing misinformation about the victim. They may create sexually explicit images, using the head of their victims attached to the bodies of porn actors. If they have real sexually explicit or nude images of their victims (usually from a failed romantic relationship between the stalker/harasser and the victim), they may create Web sites posting the images and advertising the site to friends and family of the victim, or supply them to commercial porn sites with amateur image sections for public display. We are even familiar with cases where the cyberstalker has threatened the life of the President of the United States or the Queen of England, while posing as the victim.
Excerpt on profiles:
Who stalks?
There are three basic type of stalkers Simple obsessional stalkers, delusional stalkers and vengeful stalkers. There is of course often overlap of these basic definitions.
A simple obsessional stalker is anything but simple. They are typically the person who refuses to believe that a relationship is over, although they have been told repeatedly that it is. Do not be misled by this type thinking they are harmlessly in love. Many of them were emotionally abusive and controlling during the relationship and many even have a criminal record unrelated to stalking. This is the most common type of stalker.
The next type is the delusional stalker, they frequently have never had any contact with their victim beyond the boundaries of their own mind. They may suffer from mental illness like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or erotomania. What they have in common is a false belief that keeps them tied to their victims. In erotomania they believe that the victim loves them, even though they have never met. A good example of this is the man that stalked and killed Rebecca Schaeffer. Another type of delusional stalker may believe that he and the victim are destined to be together and even though they may not have met if he only just shows how much he loves her then she will love him and they will be together as it is meant to be. An example of this type of stalker is John Hinckley Jr. that shot president Reagan in order to show Jody Foster how much he loved her.
A delusional stalker is usually a loner, unmarried, socially immature and does not possess the interpersonal skills to maintain friendships and relationships. They have had few if any sexual encounters. They most often choose victims that are unobtainable being a celebrity or a married woman, their doctor, teacher, nurse or therapist. Those helping professions are at risk for attracting a delusional stalker. Delusional stalkers are very difficult to get rid of and many go on for many years fixated on one person.
The last type of stalker is the vengeful stalker. They get angry at their victim due to some slight either real or imagined. We have all heard of disgruntled employees, these are vengeful stalkers and can be just as dangerous as the delusional. They stalk to get even and believe that "they" have been victimized. Ex-spouses can turn into this type of stalker and violence is all to common a result.
Without knowing the identity, let alone much personal information about "Anonymous", it's difficult to know which category this "Anonymous" falls into. He clearly has characteristics of the "vengeful" stalker, yet if he is someone I know or knew, he could be overlapping with another category.
I've dealt with threats before when I whistleblew about unfair labor practices and violations. I was even physically assaulted for speaking up. I do know how to take care of myself. I learned how to do that while living in a high-crime neighborhood with poor police response because of problems in the RPD. Calling the police would probably not be an option because how do know someone like "Kevin, RPD", "B. Fife" and "Asti Spamanti" are not going to show up, if they are indeed RPD officers? Or the poster who stated last year not to bother calling the RPD for help if I need it, if he is a police officer.
There are many good police officers in the RPD, but I would have to balance out a need for immediate response time, with both the reality that police officers usually do not arrive onscene until a crime is done, that you have to decide between self-defense and calling them, and the fact that it could have been an officer with a grudge against anyone who criticizes his agency who showed up or one who "prayed" for this to happen. When I see police cars near my home, I take a different way to my residence.
Several police officers from other agencies have given me their contact information and told me to call them if I need anything. Still, there are a lot of good RPD officers.
Have a nice day,
Wow what analysis Ms. Shelton.
One would think that with your skills, you could find a J O B.
Oh my mistake, you'd rather live off of taxpayers.
Greetings,
Comment moderation has been activated and all comments submitted will be subject to my approval.
Comments that are prohibited include those that are racist, sexist, homophobic or that issue threats, implied or otherwise of any kind.
Pretty much anything else is fine.
No comments by "Anonymous", the cyberstalker will be accepted for publication. He can keep sending them but they will remain in the buffer unseen by anyone else but myself and the appropriate law enforcement agencies.
Thank you,
Dear "Anonymous":
The fact that you are continuing this behavior here pretty much proves my "analysis" of you. My only error may have been failure to attribute some of those other profiles to you as well. You could be one or more of them.
Since I posted the information on cyberstalking here and I know you have read it, you will not be able to use ignorance of its definition as a defense for continuing to engage in this behavior.
Read the following:
Consider this your advisory in writing that you are to cease any contact with me through this internet site or through any other avenue on or off-line. Your communications are neither welcome nor are they wanted.
Again, consider this your written notification to cease and desist all communication with me, on or off this site.
Any further comments by you will be saved and submitted to the appropriate law enforcement agencies.
Any attempts to contact me or harass me off-line will be reported to the appropriate law enforcement agencies.
Also, a complaint will be filed against you with Blogger which will be forwarded to your ISP, which will hopefully take appropriate actions pursuant to the contract of conditions and services you agreed to before signing up for their services. The behavior you have displayed here while using your ISP(s) is prohibited under most ISP providers' contracts.
Actually, it appears most likely that it is one individual who is still engaging in this conduct. He appears to have possibly been engaging in this conduct for a while, but it's difficult to know for sure. It's possible that the majority if not all of the recent sexual comments may have been written by him. It is possible that he is responsible for at least some of the racial comments as well. He is most likely not a law enforcement officer, let alone employed by the RPD, and I have spoken with a sergeant in the RPD's Internal Affairs Division last week expressing my suspicion that this conduct is not being done by one of the department's officers. The police department deserves to be informed on that issue.
Here are more referrals on organizations on the issue of cyberstalking. There are many available organizations and resources that cover this growing problem.
More Cyberstalking resources:
Cyber Angels
(provides safety tips and resources, contacts)
Stalking through technology
(discusses the relationship between stalking off-line and that done online)
Cyberstalking: Victimology(study)
Cyberstalking and Computer Safety FAQ
(helpful tips on computer safety and what to about cyberstalking)
Cyberstalking laws by State and Country
Post a Comment
<< Home