The family responded yesterday by suggesting along with their attorney that the investigation is flawed.
I will state at the onset that I do not know what happened, however, I think it is premature to conclude that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the police officers.
Deputy Attorney General Davis Lowe wrote:
“We find no criminal conduct on the part of any of the involved officers…”
This is not a surprising finding and based on what little we know of the case, an accurate finding. The fact of the matter is, a criminal finding would have had to have shown that the police officers intended to do harm to this individual. That is a very high standard to meet and one that is not in agreement with the known facts of the incident.
In other words, there is no reason to have suspected that the officers acted in a malicious fashion. That would be the difference between an incident like Rodney King where the police officers were clearly using excessive force in an intentional and malicious matter. However, even in the King case there was no criminal conviction–rightly or wrongly. The King case in that regard represents the norm.
But that is not the end of the story. Criminal conduct is only a small amount of this case. The next question will be whether the police are civilly liable for Mr. Abraham’s death. That is a much lower standard and one that it does not appear from media accounts that the AG’s office looked into.
Sacramento Attorney Johnny L. Griffin represents the Abrahams’ family in a pending wrongful-death suit.
In his statement to the Davis Enterprise, he entertained the possibility that the state’s ruling was based on information submitted by the Woodland Police Department.
“If the material submitted by the Police Department is incomplete and/or inaccurate, the attorney general’s findings will likewise be flawed… Bottom line, the attorney general’s finding can only be as trustworthy as the information provided by the Police Department.”
If that is the case, we have no evidence to suggest either way and will have to wait for the trial for that to come out.
What we do know is that based on the information that Woodland Lt. Charlie Wilts provided, an internal investigation concluded that the actions of the officers were “consistent with the department’s use-of-force policies.”
That leads me to two final observations. In Davis, after a serious of community complaints about a variety of incidents involving the Davis Police Department, the City Council authorized the City Manager to hire an Ombudsman who could investigate such complaints as an impartial and independent arm of the city. The advantage in such a case is that you would have independent eyes investigating police tactics and whether these officers followed proper procedure. The Ombudsman would have audited and reviewed the work down by the Woodland PD’s internal investigation. Under some conditions, the Ombudsman himself in such a high profile case would have conducted the investigation.
The point here again is that the AG’s office was looking largely (apparently) at criminal conduct, much as the District Attorney’s office would have had they not been conflicted out. That is different than an internal review.
Unfortunately Woodland does not have an Ombudsman or any kind of independent investigator to do this work. Across the country, Internal Affairs units notoriously are reluctant to criticize and sustain citizen complaints on the use of force. In our investigation from two years in our Police Oversight Series, we found that nationwide over 90% of all use-of-force complaints were unfounded by IADs but a much larger percentage resulted in civil damages for the victim or the victim’s family.
That is where this incident is headed–civil court. The family’s only recourse is for this case to be adjudicated which is a very timely and very expensive endeavor. The Buzayan family’s incident occurred in June of 2005, their case is still pending in Federal Court over three years and large amounts of money later. Most individuals simply cannot afford those kinds of expenses and they end up either settling, dropping their case, or in some circumstances representing themselves. As Davis recognized two years ago, there are better ways to do this and Woodland should look into some sort of independent review process.
Finally, the Woodland PD’s finding is that the officers’ actions were “consistent with the department’s use-of-force polices.” If that is true, they ought to take this opportunity to review those policies. Experts I have spoken too, while unfamiliar with the specifics of this case, suggest that the situation with a mentally impaired individual who is largely unresponsive to police commands is a particularly difficult situation for any officer to handle. It is difficult for them to assess what is wrong or how much danger the individual represents to himself or the community.
Several officers I have spoken with off the record privately suggested that they were uncomfortable with this case while stressing that they did not know the particulars. It is their experience that often, but not always, officers are too eager to use tools such as the taser and too reluctant to try to find lower use-of-force alternatives. Better and improve training could potentially have prevented this situation even if the officers did indeed adhere to department policy.
In summary, this is not the end of the story, there will be several additional chapters to be written. The family will move forward with their suit and more of the facts will likely come out along the way.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Choke holds used to be proper police procedure in the LAPD, until there were enough civil suits filed and won to make the LAPD change that policy.
I have also seen mentally ill suspects handled w kid gloves by other police depts elsewhere in the country, which was obviously not done in this case. However, local police forces have undergone some new training from the county Mental Health Dept, so hopefully things will change for the better.
If the Woodland Police Dept does make any changes, such a change cannot be used as proof that they did something wrong in this case.
Lastly, my understanding is that the victim was quite overweight. I would hope the WPD now realizes that dog piling on a suspect that is heavyset can have unintended consequences. In short, even if the WPD followed proper police procedure, it seems pretty clear that humanity demands the current policy needs some tweaking.
Choke holds used to be proper police procedure in the LAPD, until there were enough civil suits filed and won to make the LAPD change that policy.
I have also seen mentally ill suspects handled w kid gloves by other police depts elsewhere in the country, which was obviously not done in this case. However, local police forces have undergone some new training from the county Mental Health Dept, so hopefully things will change for the better.
If the Woodland Police Dept does make any changes, such a change cannot be used as proof that they did something wrong in this case.
Lastly, my understanding is that the victim was quite overweight. I would hope the WPD now realizes that dog piling on a suspect that is heavyset can have unintended consequences. In short, even if the WPD followed proper police procedure, it seems pretty clear that humanity demands the current policy needs some tweaking.
Choke holds used to be proper police procedure in the LAPD, until there were enough civil suits filed and won to make the LAPD change that policy.
I have also seen mentally ill suspects handled w kid gloves by other police depts elsewhere in the country, which was obviously not done in this case. However, local police forces have undergone some new training from the county Mental Health Dept, so hopefully things will change for the better.
If the Woodland Police Dept does make any changes, such a change cannot be used as proof that they did something wrong in this case.
Lastly, my understanding is that the victim was quite overweight. I would hope the WPD now realizes that dog piling on a suspect that is heavyset can have unintended consequences. In short, even if the WPD followed proper police procedure, it seems pretty clear that humanity demands the current policy needs some tweaking.
Choke holds used to be proper police procedure in the LAPD, until there were enough civil suits filed and won to make the LAPD change that policy.
I have also seen mentally ill suspects handled w kid gloves by other police depts elsewhere in the country, which was obviously not done in this case. However, local police forces have undergone some new training from the county Mental Health Dept, so hopefully things will change for the better.
If the Woodland Police Dept does make any changes, such a change cannot be used as proof that they did something wrong in this case.
Lastly, my understanding is that the victim was quite overweight. I would hope the WPD now realizes that dog piling on a suspect that is heavyset can have unintended consequences. In short, even if the WPD followed proper police procedure, it seems pretty clear that humanity demands the current policy needs some tweaking.
david greenwald,
Always the critic without any personal knowledge. Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out.
Walk a mile in the victims shoes and the cop’s shoes, then tell us all what it’s like. I know you cannot,or will not, do that but I know you will keep writing your cheap little shots on YOUR blog.
Lack of knowledge and experience combined with a bias, is your downfall.
Been There………
david greenwald,
Always the critic without any personal knowledge. Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out.
Walk a mile in the victims shoes and the cop’s shoes, then tell us all what it’s like. I know you cannot,or will not, do that but I know you will keep writing your cheap little shots on YOUR blog.
Lack of knowledge and experience combined with a bias, is your downfall.
Been There………
david greenwald,
Always the critic without any personal knowledge. Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out.
Walk a mile in the victims shoes and the cop’s shoes, then tell us all what it’s like. I know you cannot,or will not, do that but I know you will keep writing your cheap little shots on YOUR blog.
Lack of knowledge and experience combined with a bias, is your downfall.
Been There………
david greenwald,
Always the critic without any personal knowledge. Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out.
Walk a mile in the victims shoes and the cop’s shoes, then tell us all what it’s like. I know you cannot,or will not, do that but I know you will keep writing your cheap little shots on YOUR blog.
Lack of knowledge and experience combined with a bias, is your downfall.
Been There………
Anonymous:
“Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out. “
There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information. So why go there and slander an unfortunate person who DIED in this incident. You add further insult by putting the term victim in quotation marks.
I find it interesting that you attack DPD for this article. All he suggests here is that the ruling by the AG is not the end of the story here, can you possibly dispute that?
Do you have anything to add here other than a clear insult on DPD? It doesn’t seem like you have added anything.
I don’t see anything here that DPD writes that makes a judgment, he questions the use of force policies, I think that is a legitimate quesiton.
Anonymous:
“Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out. “
There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information. So why go there and slander an unfortunate person who DIED in this incident. You add further insult by putting the term victim in quotation marks.
I find it interesting that you attack DPD for this article. All he suggests here is that the ruling by the AG is not the end of the story here, can you possibly dispute that?
Do you have anything to add here other than a clear insult on DPD? It doesn’t seem like you have added anything.
I don’t see anything here that DPD writes that makes a judgment, he questions the use of force policies, I think that is a legitimate quesiton.
Anonymous:
“Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out. “
There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information. So why go there and slander an unfortunate person who DIED in this incident. You add further insult by putting the term victim in quotation marks.
I find it interesting that you attack DPD for this article. All he suggests here is that the ruling by the AG is not the end of the story here, can you possibly dispute that?
Do you have anything to add here other than a clear insult on DPD? It doesn’t seem like you have added anything.
I don’t see anything here that DPD writes that makes a judgment, he questions the use of force policies, I think that is a legitimate quesiton.
Anonymous:
“Having known the “victim” for many years I can tell you he also had his violent side, that too will come out. “
There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information. So why go there and slander an unfortunate person who DIED in this incident. You add further insult by putting the term victim in quotation marks.
I find it interesting that you attack DPD for this article. All he suggests here is that the ruling by the AG is not the end of the story here, can you possibly dispute that?
Do you have anything to add here other than a clear insult on DPD? It doesn’t seem like you have added anything.
I don’t see anything here that DPD writes that makes a judgment, he questions the use of force policies, I think that is a legitimate quesiton.
“There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information.”
This is a great point, and one that applies to the discussion this incident. This is a different ANONYMOUS by the way.I don’t think anyone here has too many details about WHAT happened in this incident. Because the details are confidential.
The writer of this blog has some “experts” who express opinions but admit they are doing so without knowledge of the details. The plaintiff’s attorney obviously takes objection with the outcome of the Attorney General’s report. HE IS THE ATTORNEY….a legal advocate for the family! It’s his job to win the case! Of course he has objections. If that report uncovered a crime, this would be a slam dunk civil case.
Without ALL the facts, who knows whether some police policy or practice was flawed. The WHAT IFs are infinite.
This is a sad situation for everyone involved. Let the civil court process bring out the facts and take it’s course.
“There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information.”
This is a great point, and one that applies to the discussion this incident. This is a different ANONYMOUS by the way.I don’t think anyone here has too many details about WHAT happened in this incident. Because the details are confidential.
The writer of this blog has some “experts” who express opinions but admit they are doing so without knowledge of the details. The plaintiff’s attorney obviously takes objection with the outcome of the Attorney General’s report. HE IS THE ATTORNEY….a legal advocate for the family! It’s his job to win the case! Of course he has objections. If that report uncovered a crime, this would be a slam dunk civil case.
Without ALL the facts, who knows whether some police policy or practice was flawed. The WHAT IFs are infinite.
This is a sad situation for everyone involved. Let the civil court process bring out the facts and take it’s course.
“There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information.”
This is a great point, and one that applies to the discussion this incident. This is a different ANONYMOUS by the way.I don’t think anyone here has too many details about WHAT happened in this incident. Because the details are confidential.
The writer of this blog has some “experts” who express opinions but admit they are doing so without knowledge of the details. The plaintiff’s attorney obviously takes objection with the outcome of the Attorney General’s report. HE IS THE ATTORNEY….a legal advocate for the family! It’s his job to win the case! Of course he has objections. If that report uncovered a crime, this would be a slam dunk civil case.
Without ALL the facts, who knows whether some police policy or practice was flawed. The WHAT IFs are infinite.
This is a sad situation for everyone involved. Let the civil court process bring out the facts and take it’s course.
“There is nothing more useless than an anonymous poster making an unsubstantiated allegation. We have no way of knowing if your accusation is true or false, you provide us no details or information.”
This is a great point, and one that applies to the discussion this incident. This is a different ANONYMOUS by the way.I don’t think anyone here has too many details about WHAT happened in this incident. Because the details are confidential.
The writer of this blog has some “experts” who express opinions but admit they are doing so without knowledge of the details. The plaintiff’s attorney obviously takes objection with the outcome of the Attorney General’s report. HE IS THE ATTORNEY….a legal advocate for the family! It’s his job to win the case! Of course he has objections. If that report uncovered a crime, this would be a slam dunk civil case.
Without ALL the facts, who knows whether some police policy or practice was flawed. The WHAT IFs are infinite.
This is a sad situation for everyone involved. Let the civil court process bring out the facts and take it’s course.
This death was caused excessive force and group dynamics resulting in a group of people to pile on one individual. The police failed to appreciate the type of condition they faced and so they overreacted to the individual’s lack of responsiveness. The person is dead and the police have not detailed the changes that will happen to prevent this from happening again. To their credit the Woodland Police have started more mental health awareness training – I read about that several months ago.
As I read this AG decision I thought about gangs. If five males and a couple of females from West Sac and let’s say mostly Hispanic had confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day the result would have been much different. Let’s assume the seven people all came from very good homes and all had clean records although they all happened to know members of street gangs. Assume they confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day because they feared a pencil and could not get him to respond to their commands to move out of the way. A small scuffle would lead to a fight and group dynamics would result in a dog pile. In this case there would not be any batons or tasers, just some fists and a lot of pushing. Also assume the same result – the death of Mr. Abrahams.
The seven people would have been immediately jailed, charged with second degree murder along with gang enhancements. The DA would have come out with a statement describing how nice the victim was and there would be an uproar about street gangs.
Of course the Police are allowed more lattitude in detaining people that common citizens. I can undertand why no criminal charges were filed, but still killed a person and they owe the community the list of things that went wrong. Police departments would gain more respect if they admitted mistakes.
This death was caused excessive force and group dynamics resulting in a group of people to pile on one individual. The police failed to appreciate the type of condition they faced and so they overreacted to the individual’s lack of responsiveness. The person is dead and the police have not detailed the changes that will happen to prevent this from happening again. To their credit the Woodland Police have started more mental health awareness training – I read about that several months ago.
As I read this AG decision I thought about gangs. If five males and a couple of females from West Sac and let’s say mostly Hispanic had confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day the result would have been much different. Let’s assume the seven people all came from very good homes and all had clean records although they all happened to know members of street gangs. Assume they confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day because they feared a pencil and could not get him to respond to their commands to move out of the way. A small scuffle would lead to a fight and group dynamics would result in a dog pile. In this case there would not be any batons or tasers, just some fists and a lot of pushing. Also assume the same result – the death of Mr. Abrahams.
The seven people would have been immediately jailed, charged with second degree murder along with gang enhancements. The DA would have come out with a statement describing how nice the victim was and there would be an uproar about street gangs.
Of course the Police are allowed more lattitude in detaining people that common citizens. I can undertand why no criminal charges were filed, but still killed a person and they owe the community the list of things that went wrong. Police departments would gain more respect if they admitted mistakes.
This death was caused excessive force and group dynamics resulting in a group of people to pile on one individual. The police failed to appreciate the type of condition they faced and so they overreacted to the individual’s lack of responsiveness. The person is dead and the police have not detailed the changes that will happen to prevent this from happening again. To their credit the Woodland Police have started more mental health awareness training – I read about that several months ago.
As I read this AG decision I thought about gangs. If five males and a couple of females from West Sac and let’s say mostly Hispanic had confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day the result would have been much different. Let’s assume the seven people all came from very good homes and all had clean records although they all happened to know members of street gangs. Assume they confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day because they feared a pencil and could not get him to respond to their commands to move out of the way. A small scuffle would lead to a fight and group dynamics would result in a dog pile. In this case there would not be any batons or tasers, just some fists and a lot of pushing. Also assume the same result – the death of Mr. Abrahams.
The seven people would have been immediately jailed, charged with second degree murder along with gang enhancements. The DA would have come out with a statement describing how nice the victim was and there would be an uproar about street gangs.
Of course the Police are allowed more lattitude in detaining people that common citizens. I can undertand why no criminal charges were filed, but still killed a person and they owe the community the list of things that went wrong. Police departments would gain more respect if they admitted mistakes.
This death was caused excessive force and group dynamics resulting in a group of people to pile on one individual. The police failed to appreciate the type of condition they faced and so they overreacted to the individual’s lack of responsiveness. The person is dead and the police have not detailed the changes that will happen to prevent this from happening again. To their credit the Woodland Police have started more mental health awareness training – I read about that several months ago.
As I read this AG decision I thought about gangs. If five males and a couple of females from West Sac and let’s say mostly Hispanic had confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day the result would have been much different. Let’s assume the seven people all came from very good homes and all had clean records although they all happened to know members of street gangs. Assume they confronted Mr. Abrahams on that day because they feared a pencil and could not get him to respond to their commands to move out of the way. A small scuffle would lead to a fight and group dynamics would result in a dog pile. In this case there would not be any batons or tasers, just some fists and a lot of pushing. Also assume the same result – the death of Mr. Abrahams.
The seven people would have been immediately jailed, charged with second degree murder along with gang enhancements. The DA would have come out with a statement describing how nice the victim was and there would be an uproar about street gangs.
Of course the Police are allowed more lattitude in detaining people that common citizens. I can undertand why no criminal charges were filed, but still killed a person and they owe the community the list of things that went wrong. Police departments would gain more respect if they admitted mistakes.
Citizens do not have the power to detain people. Police have the power to detain people. That’s the difference.
Of course the police erred. Someone died when they didn’t intend to use deadly force. However, I don’t see Woodland citizens speaking up about this. They must be OK with it.
Citizens do not have the power to detain people. Police have the power to detain people. That’s the difference.
Of course the police erred. Someone died when they didn’t intend to use deadly force. However, I don’t see Woodland citizens speaking up about this. They must be OK with it.
Citizens do not have the power to detain people. Police have the power to detain people. That’s the difference.
Of course the police erred. Someone died when they didn’t intend to use deadly force. However, I don’t see Woodland citizens speaking up about this. They must be OK with it.
Citizens do not have the power to detain people. Police have the power to detain people. That’s the difference.
Of course the police erred. Someone died when they didn’t intend to use deadly force. However, I don’t see Woodland citizens speaking up about this. They must be OK with it.
To, “Citizen Of Davis”,
Believe it not citizens have the same powers of arrest as cops do. With a few minor exceptions, (infractions), you can arrest someone. If you are a business owner and someone is shoplifting from you, you have the right to detain and even handcuff them if you want.
As a “citizen” you have the same right of arrest if someone is committing a crime against you.
It is interesting to note that you automatically said, The police erred”. How do you know that? You sound like a very biased person. On the other hand, having been in Davis for more years than anyone you know, your moniker says it all.
“As a Citizen of Davis”? Where do you think the surrounding communities get the phrase, “Peoples Republic of Davis”? You are a citizen of the USA, and you happen to live in Davis. You may think you live in a little fiefdom, but you don’t.
Saying the “citizens of Woodland seem to be okay with it”, further enhances the suspicion that you live in your own private world. Just for your personal enlightenment, ignorance is curable.
To, “Citizen Of Davis”,
Believe it not citizens have the same powers of arrest as cops do. With a few minor exceptions, (infractions), you can arrest someone. If you are a business owner and someone is shoplifting from you, you have the right to detain and even handcuff them if you want.
As a “citizen” you have the same right of arrest if someone is committing a crime against you.
It is interesting to note that you automatically said, The police erred”. How do you know that? You sound like a very biased person. On the other hand, having been in Davis for more years than anyone you know, your moniker says it all.
“As a Citizen of Davis”? Where do you think the surrounding communities get the phrase, “Peoples Republic of Davis”? You are a citizen of the USA, and you happen to live in Davis. You may think you live in a little fiefdom, but you don’t.
Saying the “citizens of Woodland seem to be okay with it”, further enhances the suspicion that you live in your own private world. Just for your personal enlightenment, ignorance is curable.
To, “Citizen Of Davis”,
Believe it not citizens have the same powers of arrest as cops do. With a few minor exceptions, (infractions), you can arrest someone. If you are a business owner and someone is shoplifting from you, you have the right to detain and even handcuff them if you want.
As a “citizen” you have the same right of arrest if someone is committing a crime against you.
It is interesting to note that you automatically said, The police erred”. How do you know that? You sound like a very biased person. On the other hand, having been in Davis for more years than anyone you know, your moniker says it all.
“As a Citizen of Davis”? Where do you think the surrounding communities get the phrase, “Peoples Republic of Davis”? You are a citizen of the USA, and you happen to live in Davis. You may think you live in a little fiefdom, but you don’t.
Saying the “citizens of Woodland seem to be okay with it”, further enhances the suspicion that you live in your own private world. Just for your personal enlightenment, ignorance is curable.
To, “Citizen Of Davis”,
Believe it not citizens have the same powers of arrest as cops do. With a few minor exceptions, (infractions), you can arrest someone. If you are a business owner and someone is shoplifting from you, you have the right to detain and even handcuff them if you want.
As a “citizen” you have the same right of arrest if someone is committing a crime against you.
It is interesting to note that you automatically said, The police erred”. How do you know that? You sound like a very biased person. On the other hand, having been in Davis for more years than anyone you know, your moniker says it all.
“As a Citizen of Davis”? Where do you think the surrounding communities get the phrase, “Peoples Republic of Davis”? You are a citizen of the USA, and you happen to live in Davis. You may think you live in a little fiefdom, but you don’t.
Saying the “citizens of Woodland seem to be okay with it”, further enhances the suspicion that you live in your own private world. Just for your personal enlightenment, ignorance is curable.
To Anon at on 10/11/08 at 9 p.m.
Do you have knowledge anonymous? I know the author that wrote what you attempted to rebut and the statements were accurate. And yes david greenwald sometimes takes cheap shots without knowledge, just as you did.
To Anon at on 10/11/08 at 9 p.m.
Do you have knowledge anonymous? I know the author that wrote what you attempted to rebut and the statements were accurate. And yes david greenwald sometimes takes cheap shots without knowledge, just as you did.
To Anon at on 10/11/08 at 9 p.m.
Do you have knowledge anonymous? I know the author that wrote what you attempted to rebut and the statements were accurate. And yes david greenwald sometimes takes cheap shots without knowledge, just as you did.
To Anon at on 10/11/08 at 9 p.m.
Do you have knowledge anonymous? I know the author that wrote what you attempted to rebut and the statements were accurate. And yes david greenwald sometimes takes cheap shots without knowledge, just as you did.
The police do not care about anyone or anything except force, coercion, and abuse. Justice is far from the minds of these guys. They started thier “mental health ” training but I wonder if any of these people actually absorb their training. They try to keep the peace but they only know one way in which to do it, and that is through violence, coercion, and force. Mediation means nothing to them.
As far as they are concerned, the mentally ill should be rounded up and shot. I’ve heard them say it in their circles. I’ve been to parties with some of them, and I’ve heard they say…”we’ve got a lot of shootin to do…’ Shootin at the degenerates and sumbags, the mentally ill are unfortunately cast in the same light as criminals. it’s a shame, but i’m sure when this guy died, they were probably releived that they didn’t have to deal with him any more.
this is the state of mental health today in california
The police do not care about anyone or anything except force, coercion, and abuse. Justice is far from the minds of these guys. They started thier “mental health ” training but I wonder if any of these people actually absorb their training. They try to keep the peace but they only know one way in which to do it, and that is through violence, coercion, and force. Mediation means nothing to them.
As far as they are concerned, the mentally ill should be rounded up and shot. I’ve heard them say it in their circles. I’ve been to parties with some of them, and I’ve heard they say…”we’ve got a lot of shootin to do…’ Shootin at the degenerates and sumbags, the mentally ill are unfortunately cast in the same light as criminals. it’s a shame, but i’m sure when this guy died, they were probably releived that they didn’t have to deal with him any more.
this is the state of mental health today in california
The police do not care about anyone or anything except force, coercion, and abuse. Justice is far from the minds of these guys. They started thier “mental health ” training but I wonder if any of these people actually absorb their training. They try to keep the peace but they only know one way in which to do it, and that is through violence, coercion, and force. Mediation means nothing to them.
As far as they are concerned, the mentally ill should be rounded up and shot. I’ve heard them say it in their circles. I’ve been to parties with some of them, and I’ve heard they say…”we’ve got a lot of shootin to do…’ Shootin at the degenerates and sumbags, the mentally ill are unfortunately cast in the same light as criminals. it’s a shame, but i’m sure when this guy died, they were probably releived that they didn’t have to deal with him any more.
this is the state of mental health today in california
The police do not care about anyone or anything except force, coercion, and abuse. Justice is far from the minds of these guys. They started thier “mental health ” training but I wonder if any of these people actually absorb their training. They try to keep the peace but they only know one way in which to do it, and that is through violence, coercion, and force. Mediation means nothing to them.
As far as they are concerned, the mentally ill should be rounded up and shot. I’ve heard them say it in their circles. I’ve been to parties with some of them, and I’ve heard they say…”we’ve got a lot of shootin to do…’ Shootin at the degenerates and sumbags, the mentally ill are unfortunately cast in the same light as criminals. it’s a shame, but i’m sure when this guy died, they were probably releived that they didn’t have to deal with him any more.
this is the state of mental health today in california