By Antoinnette Borbon
Miguel and Alfredo Moreno are charged with one count, from Penal Code section 245 et seq., of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury; another from PC section 273 et seq. of child endangerment; and a third count, from PC section 182 et seq. of conspiracy to commit a crime.
The charges stem from a night in May at the Pizza Factory in Winters, where the two brothers allegedly started a brawl in the pizza parlor. The brawl involved a confrontation between Officer Steve Godden from the West Sacramento Police Department and the two Moreno brothers. Godden suffered a concussion from the incident.
In Tuesday’s testimony from Jose Lopez, the best friend of Officer Steve Godden, he would testify that he walked into the bathroom where Miguel Moreno offered him cocaine. Lopez said he refused and an exchange of words turned into the two pushing each other.
He stated, “Miguel told me to punch him on his cheek, he was very drunk, just wanting to bust someone’s balls.”
It was shortly after the two came walking out of the bathroom together when off-duty Officer Godden made the comment, “What are you guys doing in there? Kissing?” Miguel was offended by the comment, Lopez stated.
At some point the three ended up outside and it was then that Miguel tried to kick Godden. Lopez said Godden reached over his shoulder, punching Miguel and then telling him, “Go home, sleep it off.”
Lopez said Miguel left the scene only to return to the pizza parlor with his brother and partner, Alfredo.
Lopez said, “Alfredo walked in and came up to Godden and asked why he hit his brother.”
Lopez said, “Alfredo was pushing over tables, benches and coming at Godden, yelling, you don’t mess with my family!”
A fight broke out within seconds, Lopez said. He said things were flying in the air but he could not see who was doing what because he was trying to gain control of the other brother, Miguel.
Lopez stated, “Godden put a chokehold on Alfredo, squeezing his neck, he did punch him in the head about six to seven times.”
Lopez said someone put one of the brothers (Alfredo) through the plate glass window of the parlor but didn’t recall who had done that, since he was on the ground holding down Miguel Moreno. Lopez said he put Miguel into a chokehold to gain control.
Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson, representing Alfredo Moreno, in cross-examination asked Lopez to demonstrate the chokehold done by both himself and Godden.
Mr. Hutchinson asked Lopez about contacting the Winters Police Department to change his statement.
Lopez admitted that he had received the reports from an email sent to him by Lisa Godden. He testified that Steve Godden called him and asked him to look them over.
Mr. Hutchinson asked Lopez if he had left a voice message on Corporal Albert Ramos’s phone. He said he could not recall a message but said he did fill out a written form with the corrected statements.
Lopez said, “It had inaccuracies and I wanted to correct them.”
Hutchinson inquired, “Did that email have all the witnesses’ statements on it?”
“Yes, it did,” replied Lopez.
“Did you read all the statements? Or just yours?” asked Hutchinson.
“I just read mine…. it was Lisa Godden who forwarded the email to us.”
Lopez said he wanted to correct a couple statements he gave to Officer Jose Hermosillo. He explained that, after reading the report, he wanted to correct a statement about “punching Miguel.” Lopez said, “I did not say that I punched him, only pushed him.”
Lopez explained to Hutchinson that Godden was not being belligerent, but sarcastic, with Officer Hermosillo and wanted a more experienced officer to take his statements.
Hutchinson asked Lopez if he had ever used cocaine, “Yes, but not in 10 years.” Lopez admitted he had used cocaine with Miguel prior to the 10-year period.
Judge Richardson interjected, asking Lopez again, “Who put Alfredo through the window?” Lopez replied, “Um..Darin…I think,” changing his testimony from that he didn’t know.
Attorney Fidel Martinez, representing Miguel Moreno, asked Lopez about the derogatory names said to Alfredo. He asked Lopez if he heard Godden call Alfredo a queer, a faggot. Lopez stated, “I don’t know, I don’t recall what was said.”
Hutchinson had another question, “Did you recall saying to Corporal Ramos that Alfredo was grabbing everything to protect himself from Steve Godden?”
“No, I do not recall…that was inaccurate.” answered Lopez.
Another witness from the pizza parlor was an 11-year-old named Carson.
Carson was asked about what he saw that night. He told Deputy District Attorney Jay Linden that he did not hear what was said, he only saw the men outside talking and then within three minutes a fight broke out. He said his mother tried to get him to the bathroom for safety but it took a bit of time.
When DDA Linden asked the boy how he felt that night, Carson stated, “I was scared, I thought someone was going to get killed.”
Carson said he did make it to the bathroom where he was told by his mom to lock the door. He said there were about seven kids in one bathroom and kids were screaming during the brawl. Carson stated, “My mom came to get us after it was over.”
In cross-examination, Mr. Hutchinson asked, “Carson, do you think if you tell the truth here today, someone may get into trouble?’
He replied, “Um..no..um….I don’t know.”
“Is Steve Godden your friend?” asked defense counsel.
“Yes,” Carson responded.
“Carson, did anyone let you read your statements before today?” inquired Hutchinson. “Yes, my mom did, on her phone.” “And did you read other people’s statements?” asked Hutchinson. “Um….no..um…I don’t know….” replied Carson.
Kelly Lowrie testified that, on the night of May 16, after the little league game, she and her family went to have pizza. She said as she was sitting at a table near her friend, Steve Godden, Alfredo Moreno walked in and approached Godden, asking him why he hit his brother.
Ms. Lowrie stated, “Steve stood up and tried to tell him, let me explain, let me explain but Alfredo wouldn’t listen, he came at him, turning over the table.” She said a fight broke out between Steve and Alfredo.
She said things were being thrown and at one point, someone grabbed her shirt. Kelly was asked if her son actually saw the fight, and she said, “Yes, I couldn’t get him to the bathroom, I just covered his head while things were being thrown.”
She stated that Darin, one of Godden’s friends, had a chokehold on one of the guys in the brawl but she did not know who it was.
Mr. Hutchinson, in cross-examination, asked her if she knew the Goddens and she said, “Yes.” They had been friends for years, she stated.
“Did the police report come from Lisa Godden? And did it have all the witnesses’ statements?” Hutchinson asked.
“Yes, ” Lowrie replied.
“Did you ever show it to your son? Any portion of other witnesses’ statements? Mr. Hutchinson asked.
“No, he never saw it…” she answered. “My phone is broken.” Lowrie replied.
“And you said you tried to get your son to the bathroom for safety – did Carson ever make it to the bathroom?” Hutchinson inquired.
“No, he did not.” Lowrie answered.
Hutchinson asked Lowrie, “Did you tell Officer Ramos that Steve had given Alfredo a beat down?”
“Yes. ” answered Lowrie.
“What did you mean by that statement? Hutchinson asked. “I just meant, a fight, they got into a fight,” she replied.
Hutchinson commented, “Doesn’t that usually mean you got the upper hand on someone, that is what I have always thought it to mean.”
“It just meant they were fighting,” Lowrie stated.
Attorney Fidel Martinez asked Ms. Lowrie about her statements to Ramos. He asked whether she told Ramos, “Those f—Morenos, they f—pushed me!”
“Yes, I guess so, if it’s written in the report…I must have said it.”
“Did you tell Ramos you heard Godden say, queer, cowards, and swear?” Mr. Martinez asked.
She responded, “No, I didn’t hear queer, or any swearing…”
Next in today’s testimony was the pizza parlor owner who testified to seeing three men on top of Miguel Moreno outside the restaurant after the confrontation, then he called 911. (The Vanguard was in another department briefly and missed the pizzeria owner’s testimony, but this was recollected by Judge Richardson during his ruling).
Then Mr. Hutchinson called Officer Jose Hermosillo, and then Corporal Albert Ramos, to the stand to answer a few quick questions for the defense.
Hutchinson asked Hermosillo about the demeanor of Godden that night. He said Godden was belligerent and wanted a more seasoned officer to take his statements.
Hermosillo said he told Godden he needed to take his statement, but Godden did not want to talk to him. But when Godden finally did give a statement to Hermosillo, he kept referring to one of the men as “the queer, the queer.”
The witness stated, “I asked him to stop saying that, but he would not.” Officer Hermosillo said he could not tell whether Godden was still intoxicated at that time – Godden had red eyes, but Hermosillo was not sure if that was due to the fight or the alcohol.
The last witness for the day was Corporal Ramos of the Winters Police Department.
Hutchinson asked Corporal Ramos if he was the one responsible for sending out the email to Godden.
“No, I did not, I heard the case was sent over to Internal Affairs, I do not know who forwarded the reports,” asserted Ramos.
“How long have you been an officer?” asked Hutchinson. “17 years,” replied the corporal.
“And in 17 years, have you ever sent out reports of all the witnesses’ statements to witnesses? And is that procedure?” Hutchinson asked.
“No, it is not procedure, and no, I have never done that in my 17 years,” answered Ramos.
Ramos was asked about the phone message that was left from Jose Lopez about changing his statement. He said he played phone tag with Lopez but believed Lopez did send him a corrected form.
Ramos also told Hutchinson that he had audio of that night but it was hard to hear what Lopez said. However, he stated, “I am pretty sure I heard him say that he punched Miguel.”
Parties argued back and forth about continuing the hearing to see if they could reach a resolution, but DDA Linden was adamant that this case was not going to be resolved, no matter how much time went by.
After a few in-chamber meetings, Judge Richardson made his ruling to reduce two counts to misdemeanor charges, and he dropped the child endangerment charge.
Judge Richardson stated, “No sufficient evidence to hold on child endangerment, Carson testified he made it to the bathroom safely, and in looking through some of the testimony of witnesses, I believe there is too much conflicting testimony. I am not proud of the officer’s conduct. There is no hero in this case.”
I decided to post this as a comment rather than as an editor’s addendum to the article.
Steve Godden at the time of this incident was a West Sacramento Police Officer out on disability. He was not only off-duty but in Winters outside of his jurisdiction. But his father at the time was Chief of Police in Winters.
Godden is a very large man. He had been drinking, described as belligerent not just to the people at the pizza parlor but to the police officers arriving at the scene.
Out of disability, he was nevertheless able to drinking heavily and mouthed off, helping to precipitate the brawl at the pizza parlor.
Despite admitting to drinking 4 to 5 beers and driving his kids, he was neither charged with a DUI nor child endangerment.
Following this incident he retired as a police officer. Apparently there was an internal affairs investigation, but we’re not privy to those details.
Sorry, but reading this it tends to reinforce my opinion that the Vanguard is involved in another which hunt for juicy stories to satiate a general tendency toward painting law enforcement in a bad light.
It is more than obvious that the core responsibility of this unfortunate event rests with the Moreno brothers.
If that’s the case, why the Internal Affairs inquiry, the admonishment by the judge, and the early retirement of the officer right after this incident? There is also the fact that his father ended having to retire as well after no charges were filed against him? Remember, this is a preliminary hearing, so what you are reading is the prosecution’s witnesses. THe defense in most prelims do not call witnesses.
David wrote:
> There is also the fact that his father ended having to retire
> as well after no charges were filed against him?
I would not read anything in to the Dad retiring after 30+ years since most cops and firemen working after 30 years are giving taxpayers a gift.
All my cop and firefighter friends that have retired at 30 years are making MORE per year when they were working and with taxpayers starting to look at pension spiking and $250K+ “comp time” cash payments to guys at 50 it makes even more sense to retire NOW before you get less…
The father, the former chief of police, retired 5, 6, 7 years ago. I added a link yesterday.
It looks like ten years ago.
I agree Frankly, the one Moreno brother was allegedly offering drugs in the restroom of a pizza parlor where children were in attendance and the other started a huge fight. Was Godden an angel, heck no, but by no means should he be the center of the story, just one of the participants.
But was he trying to sell him drugs? He wasn’t charged with that for one thing. I think you need to treat some of this more skeptically than you are.
The difference between Moreno and Godden is that Godden was a police officer, that’s not a small thing.
Using your logic what has Godden been charged with? I think you need to look at this with a little less anti-cop bias than you are.
Isn’t that part of the problem. As noted, he admitted to at least two crimes – DUI and child endangerment – but was charged with neither. His father just happened to be chief in Winters at the time. However, as noted above, he happened to retire at about the same time, right after this incident. I suppose you think that’s coincidence?
Also where does this anti-cop charge come from, I can provide a list of many excellent police officers in this county. None of them would have partaken in this action and several expressed to me that they were appalled by this case. Why are you defending the indefensible? The Judge – a former Yolo County DA – certainly didn’t.
There you go jumping to conclusions once again against the cop. Where did he admit to a DUI? He said he had 4 to 5 beers, that doesn’t necessarily mean he drove illegally. You want to excuse Moreno’s alledged actions of offering drugs to Lopez in the bathroom because he wasn’t charged with anything but then turn around and accuse Godden of a DUI even though he wasn’t charged either. You can’t have it both ways.
Here’s the thing, if Moreno had drugs on him when he was arrested, they would have been found and he would have been charged with it. He wasn’t.
Didn’t Moreno leave and come back with his brother? He had plenty of time to get rid of the evidence. I like how you dodged the DUI accusation you made about Godden.
So are you saying Lopez lied about the drugs?
Not necessarily, I took it more as the guy making a joke rather than an actual offer.
So you’ll give Moreno a pass and write off offering someone cocaine in the restroom as just a joke but not afford Godden any such lenience? Nope, no bias there, just fair and balanced…..lol
Moreno doesn’t get a pass, he’s charged with a crime and should plea to the misdemeanor charge. But Godden got off pretty leniently, wouldn’t you say? I challenge you to find me a police officer in this county who defends Godden’s conduct.
I already said he was no angel. But you seem to just want to crucify him and overlook the Moreno brother’s actions.
I think they are charged appropriately at this point, but Godden was not. That’s my position.
Something else to remember is that all you have read is from the prosecution witnesses. There is a whole other story that has yet to come out yet.
There is another major factor, Moreno was the aggressor, the instigator. If Moreno never came in throwing tables and swinging at the officer, there would be no fight or drama.
Maybe. Again, reminding you in a preliminary hearing, only prosecution witnesses testify.
Yes, you’re right David, we’ve only heard witnesses from one side. When we hear the other side are you going to be as skeptical of the defense’s spin on things as you are of the prosecution’s?
The only way we hear from the other witnesses is if it goes to trial, do you take this case to trial?
David wrote:
> Godden is a very large man
> Despite admitting to drinking 4 to 5 beers and driving his kids, he was
> neither charged with a DUI nor child endangerment.
I don’t want to defend Godden (who sounds like a drunken bully that will as “punishment” for being a drunken bully will paid millions in retirement and healthcare by the taxpayers).
I am not a “very large man” but at 180 pounds I can drink about 1.25 beers per hour and stay under .08 so I can probably go to a baseball game and have 4-5 beers and be under .08 (a “very large man” would have no problem).
Take a look at the DMV chart below:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/curriculum/Chart%2010%20BAC%20Chart.pdf
P.S. I have never met (or heard of) anyone that got in trouble and “said” they had “a glass of wine with dinner” or “4-5 beers at a ball game” that “really” had “only” “a glass of wine with dinner” or “4-5 beers at a ball game”…
Yeah now he has retired because of a disability but it didn’t prevent him from brawling did it? I seriously doubt his need to be on the dole for the rest of his life.
He could be on disability for things other than physical ailments.
Frankly wrote:
> He could be on disability for things other than physical ailments.
Cops and Firefighters can go on “disability” for alcoholism…
It is good to know that we have plenty of finds to pay people as they struggle with ‘disease”…
Yeah, I’m not happy with the list of things that qualify for disability. My point was that we can’t call him out for faking disability just because he defended himself in a fight. Doing so looks like another anti-cop jab.
It is a crack up isn’t it. The hyper caring people demand that anyone with a sniffle becomes a victim and qualified for disability. And the PC police will call you a hater if you challenge it… except for the real cops. Like are white makes, cops are open season for branding as bad, oppressive, nasty, entitled, and unfairly benefiting from their hold on power.
Frankly wrote:
> My point was that we can’t call him out for faking disability
> just because he defended himself in a fight. Doing so looks
> like another anti-cop jab.
I was looking for a recent article that listed a bunch of CA cops and firemen on “disability” that competed in triathlons and found this one of a “disabled” cop that finished the IRONMAN triathlon.
http://www.kpho.com/story/24596862/medically-retired-mesa-cop-collecting-workers-comp-is-ironman-athlete
I’m not anti-cop (or fireman) but I know that most “disability retirement” is fake (very few cops on disability retirement are hopping around after getting shot in the leg), not to mention probably half the “workmans comp” claims are by cops or fireman hurt working at home (or like my best friend trying to pull off a flip on a snowboard years ago) that get to the fire or police station and get hurt “falling in the locker room” or “falling off a truck”…
P.S. If someone I knows gets hurt cutting trees and can’t climb trees any more he will get a new job doing something else. I don’t get why a cop or fireman (even the ones that are really hurt and can’t do the ironman) get to retire at 30 and get millions over 50+ years rather than getting some new training so they can do a desk job for at least a few more years…
It frosts me. It frosts me even more though that they retire at such a young age. I am going to turn 55 soon and I am in the prime of my working career. Having 35 years of experience makes me highly effective and a master in my disciplines. I cannot even understand retirement at this point. It just does not make any sense… unless I was just a lazy butt.
But I have friends and neighbors that retired at 50-55, or are planning to retire at 55. They are federal, state and city employees.
It is absurd that we don’t have a majority of voters demanding it stop. I cannot understand why so many just ignore it or dismiss it as a problem.
A few things;
First, I do not see how I am bias? Or anti-cop? This story is exactly what was heard during prelim..no opinion in it? Second, if you read this carefully, in Ramos and the other officers testimony for the defense, they tell the truth in their reports from when it was first given to them on the night of the brawl and to the best of their ability. How is this anti-cop? I suppose if I had left it out, it could have been? But you have two seemingly reputably good cops who tell the truth about how their own colleague was behaving that night and then you have witnesses, and the off duty cop, recanting statements, lieing and covering up stuff?
Third, as far as I am concerned, Godden can live it up, drink himself into oblivion in the privacy of his own home, but I think the problem is he chose to drink at a little league park, more than likely 6 to 7 beers, and then made the decision to put not only his children but a couple of other kids into his vehicle and drive to the pizza parlor. After he was there, he continues to drink!!
Then, he makes a “gay slur,” sarcastic comment to Moreno, while being under the influence and expects another drunk person, (Moreno) not to react, it ends up outside where he punches the guy in front of all the people at the parlor, kids included, goes back inside, continues to drink until the other brother comes back in and a huge brawl breaks out. Is he exercising good judgment to make such a comment? and/or punch someone and then proceed to turn this night into an all out ol time saloon brawl? Not saying the Moreno brothers weren’t as guilty, but remember, they got punished for their actions…
If you read the off duty conduct of an officer, it clearly states they must behave with good conduct even off duty, I believe, didn’t it? Posted by Don Shor.
Why is it bias to make this cop an example of bad behavior? The Moreno brothers were not the only ones who committed a couple crimes here, in my opinion.
My piece tells of the “good,” behavior of the two officers. Why is that disregarded? It appears that people pick out only what they want to read and/or comment about and run with it….re-read it, no bias here…
As far as drugs being offered, who even knows that is truth? Remember how some of the witnesses lied? again, go back and read how the mother of the boy was caught in her lie by her own son? No one mentions that part?
In fact, Lopez tell Ramos one thing, then wants to recant that statement once he and several others now have privy to read the entire report? seriously people…
Now, to me, and this is just my opinion here….but one of the most important factors in this entire story is the fact that these emails were forwarded to each and every witness, friends of Godden’s by his wife? Isn’t that suspicious? Tampering? Illegal? and by whose hands?
But, yes, I agree, this was a bunch of drunk people making poor choices, lacking self-control, true…but only one party was charged with a crime…the Moreno brothers…how is that not bias???
just saying…
Antoinnette wote:
> First, I do not see how I am bias? Or anti-cop?
Then writes:
> more than likely 6 to 7 beers,
The anti-cop bias comes from basically saying the cop is lying and then writing:
> As far as drugs being offered, who even knows that is truth?
Basically saying the cop and friends are lying about the coke, not saying something like “Moreno left, probably to hide the 6 or 7 8-Balls of coke he had had with him before coming back to start a fight”.
There is nothing wrong with bias and you will probably feel better if you admit it.
Everything I have read written by you has had the cops are bad/gang members are getting harassed by cops spin.
I know that there are some cops that are bad and gang members that get a raw deal, but I’m guessing that I’ll set the percentage of bad cops and innocent gag members a lot lower than you will…
Nice. Beat me to that point.
@SOD….”he more likely had 6 to 7 beers,” saying that had nothing to do with him being a cop? Just that because he lied about other statements, what would make me believe he would honestly tell the truth about how much he had to drink? Correct?
MOre than one witness lied during testimony….it was flushed out, recall? If the little boy lied to protect Godden, does that make me bias against little kids? Come on….
Hey….I am all for “Gang Members,” being taken off the street…trust me…
But “REAL” gang members, real gang related crimes….My articles on those trials just never showed enough evidence that they were real gang related crimes?
To my knowledge….I haven’t written much on “bad cops?” probably spent more time defending them….
From the explanation you wrote, the Moreno brothers were absolutely at fault and deserved to be charged. I don’t know if you are anti-cop or biased against cops. But the clear intent here… the story being chased… is one that absolutely attempts to paint law enforcement in a bad light. The inference is that Godden is at at least guilty of breaking ethic rules for off duty police, but more likely guilty of crimes but not charged because he is either connected with senior law enforcement personal through his dad, or part of the “blue brothers” network that protect their own.
Maybe you have more information. But just writing “more than likely 6 to 7 beers” when Godden admitted to drinking 4 – 5 beers… and over a period of several hours… leads me to the conclusion that there is a police witch hunt mentality percolating.
I responded yesterday that the article felt like it was anti-cop, but I said I would reserve complete and final judgement until I read the promised follow up. I did and it only reenforced what I originally felt. Maybe the next article will change my mind.
Frankly
“But the clear intent here… the story being chased… is one that absolutely attempts to paint law enforcement in a bad light.”
I do not agree with this conclusion. I do not see anything in the article that generalizes the admittedly ( by himself as well as others) suboptimal behavior of Godden to “cops” in general.
I may have missed the reference, but if so, would you point it out to me because I genuinely did not get that impression.
Tia – I think you cannot see it because you are always looking way left of reality. =)
If I say that maybe, and maybe, he lied…how is that bias….if in my own comment?
YOU still refuse to believe the lies told here by the article itself that were caught in testimony??
You are turning a blind eye to his behavior? and that isn’t bias? Yea, you want me to admit bias…ok, here it is..how about Bias for the truth, and no BS…and it has absolutely nothing to do with a cop or any single person..
Too, before you make a judgment about me being bias and/or cop hater…I strongly suggest you go back and take a look at some of my articles: People vs. Stone, Talamentes case, and a few drug busts from Yonet cops(who happen to be my good friends) and see what comments I put…trust me, I am NOT bias or against cops..
Do the research before you make that judgment….
David and I have often disagreed on cases…we don’t all have to think alike…we all have different takes, opinions on things. I still fail to see where in the story there is a bias either way. It is merely what happened…
I leave opinion for here…lol
No matter what I believe..or express about a case, there will always be another who feels differently…just the way it goes.
But, once again…I still appreciate your feedback…lol
Another way this could be looked at.
1. Godden told Miguel Moreno to “go home and sleep it off”, sounds like he’s trying to defuse the situation.
2. When Miguel and Alfredo showed up later “Godden explained that he tried to keep a fight from happening, pushing the defendants outside, trying to get them to leave, go home.” Once again trying to defuse the situation.
Barack Palin
“Godden told Miguel Moreno to “go home and sleep it off”, sounds like he’s trying to defuse the situation.”
I could have seen it that way, save for Godden’s own statement that he pushed Miguel. It is one thing to politely suggest that sleeping it off would be a good idea. It is quite another to push someone as you are telling them to leave a place of business where they have as much right to be as you do.
Let’s read the whole thing together:
“In Tuesday’s testimony from Jose Lopez, the best friend of Officer Steve Godden, he would testify that he walked into the bathroom where Miguel Moreno offered him cocaine. Lopez said he refused and an exchange of words turned into the two pushing each other.
He stated, “Miguel told me to punch him on his cheek, he was very drunk, just wanting to bust someone’s balls.”
It was shortly after the two came walking out of the bathroom together when off-duty Officer Godden made the comment, “What are you guys doing in there? Kissing?” Miguel was offended by the comment, Lopez stated.
At some point the three ended up outside and it was then that Miguel tried to kick Godden. Lopez said Godden reached over his shoulder, punching Miguel and then telling him, “Go home, sleep it off.”
Lopez and Moreno were shoving each other, not Godden. Godden punched Moreno after Moreno tried to kick him, then Godden said ” “Go home, sleep it off.”
I am glad you re-posted that part…NOW…carefully read again…so if I am reading this with a naked eye, not being the writer, I would fully believe that the Moreno’s did start the fight and also that “Antoinnette,” as the author, shows what was said and it does Not lead me to believe the cop was in the wrong?
In fact, it appears to me that I would be more bias in the cops favor, correct? Just think about it for a bit….if I were trying to push what you are suggesting, perhaps I may have worded the testimony differently…you do the math…
Antoinnette, show me where I ever wrote you had a bias? You must have me mistaken for someone else. David and I have gone back and forth but it never involved you. In fact I told you yesterday that I was okay with the original title as you had written it, I just didn’t like David’s spin on it when he condensed it. As far as your reporting, you seem to have just presented the facts of the trial, which is as it should be.
I think we have a cultural divide here between the sexes. Watch the movie, Gran Torino, with Clint Eastwood. Men use slurs towards each other as a method of bonding and joking, many have not been through 20 years of indoctrination. Most men grow out of it. I’m not saying it’s good or bad, I’m just saying it is what is is.
TBD, when in elementary school and middle school, I and my classmates were subject to discipline with a “paddle.” That tradition of public corporal punishment was supported by well over 20 years of indoctrination. Does your final sentence apply in that case as well? “Most men grow out of it. I’m not saying it’s good or bad, I’m just saying it is what is is.”
.
Matt, I now know why you’re the upstanding person that you are today. I too was taken out to the garage as a kid.
agree, Barack, sorry, I believe I just misspelled your name.
Matt is a great guy!
Gran Torino, great movie. Every nationality took their lumps in that flick. Godden saying to Lopez and Moreno when they came out of the restroom “What are you guys doing in there? Kissing?” is something my friends and I might say to each other and not take it as a gay slur.
I still need to watch that movie, thanks for reminding me…I am not so concerned with the slurs..although, it is hurtful to some…I will leave it there…
It is a cultural divide between different worldviews, not genders. But it just so happens that different worldviews tend to filter on gender.
My poor mother, God rest her soul, used to try and stop her four sons and her husband from getting into dinner-time arguments. 99.999% of the time they were just verbal, but a few times the arguments turned into blows being thrown.
Mom generally did not succeed unless she got real upset.
If mom would have had her way she would have put us in jail when we fought just so she was not so anxious about it.
But then she wasn’t a male and didn’t understand the male testosterone-fueled behavior and male social codes.
There are males that struggle understanding it too. And there are females that struggle understanding more typical female behavior and codes.
You can see them all filtering in politics and it is why gender is such a hot-button issue in politics.
Much of what I am reading here is just ramblings from people that don’t understand, and/or don’t like, average male behavior. That would be no problem except for these people are motivated to start jailing and punishing people for what are just stupid conflicts between the peacocks.
In utopia we all get along and sing kumbaya. Testosterone has been banned, aggressive behavior of any kind is disallowed, and only precise language is allowed. And we have to get in touch with our feeling and be very sensitive to the hurt feelings of others. Now some males are already good at this type of high-sensing thing, but most are not. And those that are not are feeling less and less like a valued part of society that tends to go off the rails in extremes over what has been normal since men and women walked the earth.
And news flash… cops are over-represented in the population of males that are not high sensing.
oops…
So, to sum it up, the state pays for a cop to be participating in a drunken brawl exercising hate slurs…hmmm…maybe that should have been the title?
Now I am being sarcastic…lol….just saying folks…
Is “Antoinnette” posting here the same person as “Antonnette” (without an “i” in her name) who name is listed as author of the article?
Yes
SOD, thought I caught everything. Not sure who misspelled A’s name, A or David, but I should have caught it. I usually look at the names, which are virtually never wrong.
Nice summary Antoinnette.
What a shame that everyone involved was not arrested, drug tested, and charged appropriately. Then we would have an accurate depiction of each individuals role in what actually occurred. Then instead of having a “cherry picked” and possibly altered version of events, the judicial court system would have a way of determining what each individual’s culpability was regardless of their day job.
Thank you Tia…and that is exactly how Judge Richardson felt….he said a few things in regards to this case and mostly expressed his dislike in the whole mess.
Yes, everyone involved should have been held accountable…..in my opinion. But again, he may have to answer to a higher command when it is all said and done…a case does not get turned over to Internal Affairs for one of their own just being, “drunk and stupid,” I am guessing…
I didn’t get to read this article all the way through until now, and an interesting parallel to a larger story popped out at me. Imagine that the above passage read as follows:
Wow…thanks for that one, Matt…
One last thing…..bear in mind folks that this is what was heard in testimony for the prosecution, not defense’s case, although the two officers testified for defense but being that it is not going to trial..I imagine we will never really know the whole truth about what happened.
Thus, leaving us all to assume, speculate, imagine and guestimate the truth….as in any case, right?
I am sure I can bet on being bias for that one too…lol…
Oh, sorry, Barrack….my mistake….lol…there is so many comments posted, I got lost…I apologize…lol
Thanks for letting me know!
Oh…..just wondering, what is a Frankly Pill? lol….
Do I need one…..lol