Cops kill Downs man, blame paramedics

[Carla_Danger]

sounds like maybe the cop was retarded too...

Unless you're a complete idiot, you can tell by looking at him. They shouldn't have been forceful with him at all....especially over a Goddamn movie ticket. Jeebus Cripes!

All 3 of them?

 

[irosie91]

the point I tried to make is that saying a person has DOWN's syndrome does not say------to most people------"that means he has all kinds of bone and heart and structural abnormalities"----it just means "mentally retarded" Did you know that Down's people have heart problems? does your next door neighbor know?

And you think it's okay for the police to be wrestling with mentally retarded people, over a damn movie ticket?

Wow.

Hell yes, they should have known better.

I can't believe you don't expect better from our tax paid law enforcement.

Have you ever seen very combative people in action?
The cops are people too. When a person goes dangerously
"beserk" so do they. I know they are human beans----with human frailties and can make mistakes in snap judgements

He got combative because someone tried to forceably remove him. He didnt attack anyone.

right----cops are supposed to "forcibly" remove people-----and resisting that "force" is called a crime-------that is THEIR CULTURE. I have not seen cops who stood aside and said
"well----no one likes to be forced----so I understand" Maybe
the bobbys in London ----not the cops in my town

I've seen my brother in law that is a cop use his intelligence and discretion in a very similar situation. Instead of attacking the mentally ill person he helped him and finally got the guy to leave the store.

ok....... each situation is different and different cops have
different "styles" --------JUDGEMENT IN THE FIELD is easy
to "judge"---two weeks later

 

[Valerie]

they were mall cops fyi "deputies, moonlighting as mall security officers"

...disputing the official cause of death of a man with Down syndrome who died as they tried to forcibly remove him from a movie theater in 2013.


Robert Ethan Saylor probably died from an underlying medical problem and not from asphyxia, as determined by the Office of the Chief State Medical Examiner, the Frederick County deputies say in a document that was briefly posted by mistake on a federal court website.

Deputies Dispute That Asphyxia Caused Disabled Man's Death

 

[Asclepias]

And you think it's okay for the police to be wrestling with mentally retarded people, over a damn movie ticket?

Wow.

Hell yes, they should have known better.

I can't believe you don't expect better from our tax paid law enforcement.

Have you ever seen very combative people in action?
The cops are people too. When a person goes dangerously
"beserk" so do they. I know they are human beans----with human frailties and can make mistakes in snap judgements

He got combative because someone tried to forceably remove him. He didnt attack anyone.

right----cops are supposed to "forcibly" remove people-----and resisting that "force" is called a crime-------that is THEIR CULTURE. I have not seen cops who stood aside and said
"well----no one likes to be forced----so I understand" Maybe
the bobbys in London ----not the cops in my town

I've seen my brother in law that is a cop use his intelligence and discretion in a very similar situation. Instead of attacking the mentally ill person he helped him and finally got the guy to leave the store.

ok....... each situation is different and different cops have
different "styles" --------JUDGEMENT IN THE FIELD is easy
to "judge"---two weeks later

This one is pretty clear cut. There is zero reason to attack a Downs syndrome person thats not harming anyone. The fact that the aide was there telling them what the issue was makes it more inexcusable.

 

[Carla_Danger]

they were mall cops fyi "deputies, moonlighting as mall security officers"

...disputing the official cause of death of a man with Down syndrome who died as they tried to forcibly remove him from a movie theater in 2013.


Robert Ethan Saylor probably died from an underlying medical problem and not from asphyxia, as determined by the Office of the Chief State Medical Examiner, the Frederick County deputies say in a document that was briefly posted by mistake on a federal court website.

Deputies Dispute That Asphyxia Caused Disabled Man's Death

There was a witness who saw these off duty officers (mall cops) wrestle him down to the ground, had him on his stomach, with a knee in his back while they handcuffed him. There's a serious lack of competence when it comes to the police handling people with special needs. Every cop who hasn't had CIT training, needs to have it asap.

This man wouldn't have died if those off duty officers had been competent, and that's really the bottom line.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Even if he had not been handicapped, the reaction of the police is out of line.

We are now living in a police state and RWs are making excuses for them.

If this had been Palin's kid, RWs would be reacting differently.

 

[irosie91]

I have worked in inner city hospitals----actually most of my employed life-------I have seen lots and lots of people CUFFED
in the emergency room. --------how do you guys think it is done? -----btw-----in most of those emergency rooms in which I worked----the cops doing the cuffing have been black-----one lady cop
amazed me with her acrobatics and dexterity. The scene was short stout lady JUMPS high in the air-----onto the back of the person to be cuffed (always a male)------he is down and suddenly a flash of steel ----bang bang----the guy is cuffed---
hands behind his back----that is how it is done. She was amazing

 

[Carla_Danger]

I have worked in inner city hospitals----actually most of my employed life-------I have seen lots and lots of people CUFFED
in the emergency room. --------how do you guys think it is done? -----btw-----in most of those emergency rooms in which I worked----the cops doing the cuffing have been black-----one lady cop
amazed me with her acrobatics and dexterity. The scene was short stout lady JUMPS high in the air-----onto the back of the person to be cuffed (always a male)------he is down and suddenly a flash of steel ----bang bang----the guy is cuffed---
hands behind his back----that is how it is done. She was amazing

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

 

[irosie91]

I have worked in inner city hospitals----actually most of my employed life-------I have seen lots and lots of people CUFFED
in the emergency room. --------how do you guys think it is done? -----btw-----in most of those emergency rooms in which I worked----the cops doing the cuffing have been black-----one lady cop
amazed me with her acrobatics and dexterity. The scene was short stout lady JUMPS high in the air-----onto the back of the person to be cuffed (always a male)------he is down and suddenly a flash of steel ----bang bang----the guy is cuffed---
hands behind his back----that is how it is done. She was amazing

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

 

[Carla_Danger]

I have worked in inner city hospitals----actually most of my employed life-------I have seen lots and lots of people CUFFED
in the emergency room. --------how do you guys think it is done? -----btw-----in most of those emergency rooms in which I worked----the cops doing the cuffing have been black-----one lady cop
amazed me with her acrobatics and dexterity. The scene was short stout lady JUMPS high in the air-----onto the back of the person to be cuffed (always a male)------he is down and suddenly a flash of steel ----bang bang----the guy is cuffed---
hands behind his back----that is how it is done. She was amazing

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

 

[irosie91]

I have worked in inner city hospitals----actually most of my employed life-------I have seen lots and lots of people CUFFED
in the emergency room. --------how do you guys think it is done? -----btw-----in most of those emergency rooms in which I worked----the cops doing the cuffing have been black-----one lady cop
amazed me with her acrobatics and dexterity. The scene was short stout lady JUMPS high in the air-----onto the back of the person to be cuffed (always a male)------he is down and suddenly a flash of steel ----bang bang----the guy is cuffed---
hands behind his back----that is how it is done. She was amazing

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

 

[Ravi]

I have worked in inner city hospitals----actually most of my employed life-------I have seen lots and lots of people CUFFED
in the emergency room. --------how do you guys think it is done? -----btw-----in most of those emergency rooms in which I worked----the cops doing the cuffing have been black-----one lady cop
amazed me with her acrobatics and dexterity. The scene was short stout lady JUMPS high in the air-----onto the back of the person to be cuffed (always a male)------he is down and suddenly a flash of steel ----bang bang----the guy is cuffed---
hands behind his back----that is how it is done. She was amazing

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

 

[irosie91]

I have worked in inner city hospitals----actually most of my employed life-------I have seen lots and lots of people CUFFED
in the emergency room. --------how do you guys think it is done? -----btw-----in most of those emergency rooms in which I worked----the cops doing the cuffing have been black-----one lady cop
amazed me with her acrobatics and dexterity. The scene was short stout lady JUMPS high in the air-----onto the back of the person to be cuffed (always a male)------he is down and suddenly a flash of steel ----bang bang----the guy is cuffed---
hands behind his back----that is how it is done. She was amazing

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

It is a great tragedy that it happened that way. I do not believe that the security guards had a POLICY of killing people who thought it a good idea to see the movie twice. I do believe that
the attempt to remove that person ESCALATED into a physical fight------and the guards----being average guys----did not know that a strong ---muscle bound--healthy but odd looking person had serious physical vulnerabilities-----would YOU KNOW?.

 

[Ravi]

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

It is a great tragedy that it happened that way. I do not believe that the security guards had a POLICY of killing people who thought it a good idea to see the movie twice. I do believe that
the attempt to remove that person ESCALATED into a physical fight------and the guards----being average guys----did not know that a strong ---muscle bound--healthy but odd looking person had serious physical vulnerabilities-----would YOU KNOW?.

Yeah, I would no that it makes no sense to manhandle a retarded person that won't get out of his seat.

 

[irosie91]

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

It is a great tragedy that it happened that way. I do not believe that the security guards had a POLICY of killing people who thought it a good idea to see the movie twice. I do believe that
the attempt to remove that person ESCALATED into a physical fight------and the guards----being average guys----did not know that a strong ---muscle bound--healthy but odd looking person had serious physical vulnerabilities-----would YOU KNOW?.

Yeah, I would no that it makes no sense to manhandle a retarded person that won't get out of his seat.

you would? how would you know that he is "retarded"?---
"retarded" ain't really a diagnosis

 

[Ravi]

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

It is a great tragedy that it happened that way. I do not believe that the security guards had a POLICY of killing people who thought it a good idea to see the movie twice. I do believe that
the attempt to remove that person ESCALATED into a physical fight------and the guards----being average guys----did not know that a strong ---muscle bound--healthy but odd looking person had serious physical vulnerabilities-----would YOU KNOW?.

Yeah, I would no that it makes no sense to manhandle a retarded person that won't get out of his seat.

you would? how would you know that he is "retarded"?---
"retarded" ain't really a diagnosis

One, he has the features. Two, his health aide was right there with him.

 

[irosie91]

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

It is a great tragedy that it happened that way. I do not believe that the security guards had a POLICY of killing people who thought it a good idea to see the movie twice. I do believe that
the attempt to remove that person ESCALATED into a physical fight------and the guards----being average guys----did not know that a strong ---muscle bound--healthy but odd looking person had serious physical vulnerabilities-----would YOU KNOW?.

Yeah, I would no that it makes no sense to manhandle a retarded person that won't get out of his seat.

you would? how would you know that he is "retarded"?---
"retarded" ain't really a diagnosis

One, he has the features. Two, his health aide was right there with him.

oh-----the "health aide"--------the average looking woman
with no visible sign of a credential----sitting next to the odd
looking but healthy looking guy who refuses to leave-

 

[Asclepias]

What part of, they shouldn't have hand cuffed him to begin with don't you get?

I have finally read the article-----there is insufficient evidence about the autopsy and about the events to draw any conclusion at all based on the information in that article.
There is virtually NOTHING THERE. I have attended autopsies and conferences on autopsy findings----there was
almost NOTHING in the article -------the first evaluator
found a fractured larynx and decided to call it "homicide"--
that's about it -----the witnesses for the prosecution were all HIRED GUNS -----the defense information was not presented I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HAPPENED. There is
no information as to why the cops thought they should cuff
the man-----or why anyone claimed that they should not have
done so ------nothing. The note written by the paramedic would have been nice ------what did they do? I do not even know why anyone called paramedics

I guess we could use a little common sense. Would it have hurt the cops and the theater to let the man watch the movie again, or at least until they could contact the mother? No, of course not. We know why he died. He died because the cops were incompetent.

Yes----it would have been better. It is not entirely clear to me that the cops were "incompetent"

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

It is a great tragedy that it happened that way. I do not believe that the security guards had a POLICY of killing people who thought it a good idea to see the movie twice. I do believe that
the attempt to remove that person ESCALATED into a physical fight------and the guards----being average guys----did not know that a strong ---muscle bound--healthy but odd looking person had serious physical vulnerabilities-----would YOU KNOW?.

I think the better question is what moron wouldnt know?

 

[Asclepias]

In the normal course of events it is wrong to kill someone who thinks he can watch a movie twice.

It is a great tragedy that it happened that way. I do not believe that the security guards had a POLICY of killing people who thought it a good idea to see the movie twice. I do believe that
the attempt to remove that person ESCALATED into a physical fight------and the guards----being average guys----did not know that a strong ---muscle bound--healthy but odd looking person had serious physical vulnerabilities-----would YOU KNOW?.

Yeah, I would no that it makes no sense to manhandle a retarded person that won't get out of his seat.

you would? how would you know that he is "retarded"?---
"retarded" ain't really a diagnosis

One, he has the features. Two, his health aide was right there with him.

oh-----the "health aide"--------the average looking woman
with no visible sign of a credential----sitting next to the odd
looking but healthy looking guy who refuses to leave-

So you think it was a matter of credibility? So everyone simply ignored the explanation that this odd looking guy had Downs syndrome because she didnt have the correct ID? Can you tell me what papers or ID she would have been carrying to be more credible?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Typical day for the blue mafia