Ex-cop exchanges fire with authorities: Report

Let's see how this 2nd Amendment fight against government Tyranny turns out for him.

Journalist, I want you to investigate every location I resided in growing up. Find any incidents where I was ever accused of being a bully. You won’t, because it doesn’t exist. It’s not in my DNA. Never was.

I lived a good life and though not a religious man I always stuck to my own personal code of ethics, ethos and always stuck to my shoreline and true North. I didn’t need the US Navy to instill Honor, Courage, and Commitment in me but I thank them for re-enforcing it. It’s in my DNA.

Doesn't SWAT usually send in those smoke grenades that "somehow" seem to always start fires in the buildings....?

Who's gonna play Dorner in the movie?

Feb 12, 2013 - 11:23pm PT

LL Cool J.... Hands down.
Credit: Dick Danger

seems like Rons mouth gets ahead of him sometimes.

It is almost like watching 'Django Unchained' in real life."

Truth be told, 100,000 years ago,

I don't see much good to be had expending any effort to take this guy alive.

Terrorist wanted to die and take a bunch of folks with him

Audio from a Los Angeles television station captured the sound of someone early in the standoff shouting, "Burn it down ... burn that goddamn house down. Burn it down." It's not clear who used those words.

But the order to use smoke canisters -- "burners" -- didn't come for another two hours, according to San Bernardino County sheriff's radio traffic.

"Seven burners deployed, and we have a fire," one officer reported at 4:16 p.m. (7:16 p.m. ET).

Terrorist wanted to die and take a bunch of folks with him. Best to kill him as quickly and safely as possible.

He had many chances to surrender, and go to jail
He decided he would fight it out, and death was the only option in the end

All I'm sayin' is you can't learn much from dead man.

Update Feb. 13, 2013, 7:30 p.m.:
San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon said at a press conference Wednesday afternoon that the fire was not set on purpose. "We did not intentionally burn down that cabin to get Mr. Dorner out," McMahon said. However, McMahon said one type of tear gas used was "pyrotechnic" and acknowledged that it "does generate a lot of heat." McMahon said the fire "erupted" after police launched the pyrotechnic canisters, which are called "burners," into the cabin.

In the police audio, which was broadcast on CBS affiliate KCAL-TV on Tuesday, frantic voices of officers can be heard, including one officer apparently saying "Burn it down" or "Burn him out," while another officer appears to shout, "F*ing burn this motherf**r!"

The audio's veracity could not be confirmed.

Click the video above to hear the police audio from KCAL-TV.

In addition, a video that has surfaced on YouTube appears to include another recording of police audio from Tuesday's standoff. In the audio, which could not be independently confirmed, a voice says, "We're gonna go forward with the plan, with the burn ... Like we talked about."

A short while later a male voice says: "Seven burners deployed and we have a fire." A female voice then responds: "Copy. Seven burners deployed and we have a fire."

If some soldier in Toledo woke up one day in 1943, decided that the US was unfairly persecuting Germany, and proceeded to shoot some other soldiers on a train, should the soldiers get Purple Hearts because they were wounded by "enemy action?

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Above is video from this past weekend of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announcing a $1-million reward for information that led to the capture of Christopher Dorner, the ex-cop turned suspected cop killer who at that point had been on the run from authorities for about a week. Word of the seven-figure payout quickly became part of a story that was already dominating national news, helping to bring in more than 1,000 tips as to the fugitive's whereabouts in the process.

For all intents and purposes that manhunt ended on Tuesday, when the cabin Dorner was believed to be holed up in burned to the ground as it was surrounded by police. So who will get that money once the case is officially closed? Probably no one. Here's Villaraigosa's full-quote from that news conference, see if you can spot the giant loophole:

"Yesterday leaders from throughout the region, including leaders from businesses and unions, government, law enforcement and community groups, came together to pool resources and protect our core value of public safety. Collectively this group, led by my office, is posting a reward of $1 million for information that will lead to Mr. Dorner's capture."

Yep, thanks to some careful phrasing, it appears as though the city can hold on to its cash because Dorner wasn't technically "captured" before he died. The official story out of the mayor's office is that it's too early to say whether it will pay out the reward or not, but from the sounds of it a payout seems unlikely. As LAPD officer Alex Martinez bluntly told CBS News: "There was no capture and no conviction. It's kind of a no-brainer."

So any American who kills a soldier has committed treason?

Was the Fort Hood guy "aiding the enemy," making a political statement, or just pissed at his co-workers?

I don't have the answers, but I'm sure it's not "pretty simple."

Just what the f*#k IS a terrorist?

Dorner was no terrorist. That's workplace violence. Or just mayhem.

Since everyone was presumably wearing armor we can assume that guy could really shoot. Two people in armor and he got both. All the deputies knew that, very well.

They had to settle it before dark. Once it was dark they could assume he would fire in each of the four quadrants to learn their force distribution. Then he would throw out more smoke canisters and try under cover of darkness either to attack their strength or to penetrate the perimeter.

I think they're all paid way too much.

Nevermind Django's original grievance, which if true, makes the cops in L.A. look like low-rent gangsters. That was rendered moot the minute he pointed a gun at his first victim.

Purple heart medals and the benefits for everyone! Why not?

It's an old school fact of life that if you kill a cop, you too are going to die. It's the epitome of ignorance to think the cops would be careful to capture the cop killer without a scratch. That dude was doomed. Wonder what percentage of cop killers are actually captured?

If I found out who stole my last rack, or my last bicycle ( or any of my other bikes stolen previously ), or my last crop of avocados, I'd like nothing more than to burn down the mother f*#ker's house with him inside ( and shoot the bastard if he tries to leave ). That would please me very much.

It's an old school fact of life that if you kill a cop, you too are going to die. It's the epitome of ignorance to think the cops would be careful to capture the cop killer without a scratch. That dude was doomed. Wonder what percentage of cop killers are actually captured?

JL

GC, In case you didn't notice, This guy ran around town shooting dead the offspring of those he meant to kill but hadn't the ability to follow through on the ones he wanted.

That's emotional thinking.

He then while in flight shot dead a peace officer and grievously wounded an other. Then he holed up in a cabin that was luckily uninhabited and refused to surrender.

Where does your take on civil liberties concerning the civil, cross paths with the public good in face of an incorrigible sociopath ?

This guy thought he had morality and social conscience on his side but he didn't think it worth asking someone or anyone what was ethical.

]his guy thought he had morality and social conscience on his side but he didn't think it worth asking someone or anyone what was ethical.

the problem is, that when we accept routine conspiracy to murder as being an acceptable operating method, we have lost control of due process.

And, we have.

GC, In case you didn't notice, This guy ran around town shooting dead the offspring of those he meant to kill but hadn't the ability to follow through on the ones he wanted.

That's emotional thinking.

He then while in flight shot dead a peace officer and grievously wounded an other. Then he holed up in a cabin that was luckily uninhabited and refused to surrender.

Where does your take on civil liberties concerning the civil, cross paths with the public good in face of an incorrigible sociopath ?

This guy thought he had morality and some social conscience on his side but he didn't think it worth asking someone or anyone what was ethical.

No one is defending what Dorner is alleged to have done. If he did what they claim he did, he is a homicidal maniac. Also, I have no reason to think that he didn't do what the claim.

If I were a cop, and a lot of people tell me, that you, Jim Brennan, are an "incorrigible sociopath" does that give me the right to kill you?

Do you believe that the the accused always guilty and not deserving of a trial?

The police believed that Dorner was targeting police and their families. This could make it very difficult for them to think rationally.

If you're ACCUSED of murder, would you want the family of the murder victim to have the ability to hunt you down and kill you without any trial?

So you think I'm a sociopath ?

You should make your case and be willing to take it to open court.

Otherwise you have just made yourself open to a libel suit as befitting someone who thought printing an opinion casually equals free speech.

Go F*#k Your Self,D#@&%e...

Awfully quiet all the sudden great Climber of Granite,

Who do you think you are ?

There is a reality to being a self important entity and that is what you think you say is just something on the internet.

I will follow through on your bullsh#t. You have no Anders and all the academic laziness encumbered to feel comfort through. You are a fraud.

There are many people here who have taken you to the intellectual cleaners and will happily do so again because you are not what you think you are.

You stated that:

"if I were a cop,and a lot of people tell me,that you, Jim Brennan,are "an incorrigible psychopath" does not give me the right to kill you?

You will not get off for a misplaced emotional comment for that.

You are now accountable for your statement. You have posted this publicly and are now responsible for your statement.

"What difference does it make if one of the officers puts a … round in his head, drives the armored vehicle over his body when they are knocking the building down, or he dies in a conflagration?" said David Klinger, a use-of-force expert at the University of Missouri at St. Louis and a former LAPD officer. "If he is trying to surrender you can't do any of those things … But if he is actively trying to murder people, there's no doubt that deadly force is appropriate and it doesn't matter what method is used to deliver it."

But at least it saved the taxpayers millions in prosecuting him and giving
him three hots and a cot for life.

I think the fact that Dorner fired shots from the house gives the cops the authority to use deadly force against him. Although I agree the cops likely had no interest in applying proper due process, Dorner's actions at the house narrowed the cops' alternatives considerably.

But how did the cops know that there was not someone else in the house?

Edit:
I just read GC's link, wherein one commentator made the same point I wrote above. So my post is kind of redundant:

I doubt there is any technology that can reliably confirm that there is only a single living human in a house.

And if such technology did exist, I doubt that a city police force would have it readily at hand.

, he clearly didn't want to harm civilians (who weren't connected to law enforcement).

I was thinking let the fućker roast, and wished him a speedy trip to hell.

It's a simple power play. Cops are hired to control things that are otherwise dangerous. If they need apply deadly force, we trust them to do so for our well being.

let he who is without fear get point on that breach. Let he who says it was over the top go first through a door. Then let those statements out. Easy to critique from a five hundred miles away. I notice ive not seen any one say they would have gone in after him..They knew he was on a do AND die mission. He did too.

the vast majority of cops take the job because they simply aren't qualified to do good work of any kind

I've met some cops that are so nice

Poitn well taken. But in my experience, the "rules" that matter to those actually involved are written not by legislators but by - those involved. These rules say - here lies a killing field. Once you enter it, guns drawn or blazing, you are fair game. We in the peanut gallery say the people involved should behave as we see, under our oversight, but has this ever really played out in the real world, or do those with the weapons and official status and those who are outlaws just do pretty much as they please, and have done so since the beginning of time?

My point being what we might like - total accountability and adherence to a sober, humane ethic - is something having nothing to do with the power struggle itself ("good" versus "bad"). We on the sidelines WANT responsible, non-violent action if and when possible, but there is no way to impose this on the folks in the fray. That leaves us blathering on the sidelines, like two bald men arguing over a comb.

So GC,

Would you be so academic in your above expressions if this armed Dorner individual stole your car, while throwing you out, saying,"I don't want to hurt you"...

Is there some tacit comfort presumed, without being in this real situation for those that were actually challenged ?

Or do you just feel down with the cause when it comes to what really happened and are presumptuous about being respected by a stranger for you opinions in a bad situation ?

Or do you just feel down with the cause when it comes to what really happened and are presumptuous about being respected by a stranger for you opinions in a bad situation ?

What we are doing here is having a conversation about a milieu where our opinions count for little to nothing at all. That brings out the advocate in some of us - and this also has no bearing on the power struggle, which mostly operates on its own set of rules. This short-circuits many still under the illusion that public policy need only be on the books to count in the real world. But history does not bear this out at all.

Or do you just feel down with the cause when it comes to what really happened and are presumptuous about being respected by a stranger for you opinions in a bad situation ?

John, I think the above concept is a abrogation to any responsibility for anything that goes on.

Md. man with Down syndrome who died in police custody loved law enforcement

"As officials tell it, Saylor had been watching “Zero Dark Thirty” at a Frederick movie theater last month and, as soon as it ended, wanted to watch it again. When he refused to leave, a theater employee called three off-duty Frederick County sheriff’s deputies who were working a security job at the Westview Promenade shopping center and told them that Saylor either needed to buy another ticket or be removed."



"Cpl. Jennifer Bailey, a spokeswoman for the sheriff’s office, said Saylor cursed at the deputies, who weren’t wearing uniforms, and began hitting and kicking them. The deputies restrained him using three sets of handcuffs linked together and escorted him from the theater. At some point, Saylor ended up on the ground and began showing signs of medical distress. A short while later, he was pronounced dead at a local hospital."

"Late last week, the Chief Medical Examiner’s Office in Baltimore ruled Saylor’s death a homicide as a result of asphyxia."

Ever since “going postal” massacres first appeared in the public sector, in US post offices in the mid-1980s, they have tended to follow a familiar script. The murderer “snaps” for no apparent reason; official culture blames it all on Hollywood or guns, never explaining why these workplace massacres only appeared in the mid-late 80s; and later, as it turns out, there were a lot of reasons for the gunman to snap. If you profile the workplace that created the murderer, rather profiling the murderer’s psychology, you will often find a pattern of shocking workplace abuse and of top-down mistreatment of employees, culminating in the “going postal” rampage. The consequent killing spree will target supervisors, fellow employees, and anyone associated with the institution that the abused employee blames for having crushed him (or her).

The LAPD is a textbook example of one of the most abusive public sector employers in America today — and this context, along with the details of Dorner’s firing and his appeals, are the real missing pieces in the puzzle.

Dorner was put out on the field with a supervising officer, a 42-year-old woman named Teresa Evans. According to Dorner, Evans was “angry” and sadistic. His legal filings repeatedly reference an incident in which Evans was arrested by Long Beach police for “domestic violence” in June 2007, resulting in an apparent demotion for Evans. Dorner also reported that Evans “slapped” his hands on at least two occasions, and that in one incident when they detained a woman in her mid-70s, Evans “tore the skin off” the old woman’s forearm, requiring medical treatment. In court documents, LAPD investigators never deny Evans’ arrest for domestic violence, but instead dismiss it as immaterial in their case against Dorner for false testimony.

For her part, Teresa Evans claimed that Dorner was overly emotional, citing an incident in which Dorner supposedly began “weeping” while out on patrol, begging to be put through LAPD reintegration training.

On July 28, 2007, Dorner and Sgt. Evans responded to a reported disturbance at a Doubletree Hotel. The suspect, a paranoid-schizophrenic named Christopher Gettler, refused to comply. Dorner, despite his great size and strength, was unable to subdue Gettler long enough to cuff him. They fell forward into some bushes as Teresa Evans shot him twice with a Taser, and then — according to Dorner — she kicked Gettler three times: first softly on the clavicle, then again more roughly, and a third swift kick to Gettler’s eye.

Gettler’s eye swelled and bled. Teresa Evans claimed that he’d cut himself in the bushes. Ultimately, there were no reliable witnesses to testify that Evans had or hadn’t kicked Gettler, and his father, who was deferential to the police due to numerous incidents involving his son over the years, didn’t bother pressing charges. Gettler gave video testimony backing up Dorner's version of events — that Evans kicked him three times, once in the face below the eye — but Gettler's testimony was ruled inadmissible.

The case against Dorner, in public and in the police Board of Rights, rests largely on the theory that Dorner sought revenge after supposedly getting a bad review from Teresa Evans, and his revenge was falsely reporting her for police misconduct.

However, court filings paint a different sequence of events: For one thing, although Evans’ evaluation did cite “improvement needed” in a few areas, overall she gave him a “satisfactory” review, not “unsatisfactory.” Moreover, while it’s true that Dorner reported the kicking to Sgt. Perez the day after Teresa Evans submitted her evaluation on Dorner, he didn’t see her evaluation until several weeks later, well after he’d reported her for police misconduct. But the most important point Dorner and his attorneys kept trying to get across was that Evans' evaluation was "satisfactory" — her evaluation would not have hurt Dorner's career.

Chris Dorner’s bad luck, if that’s the right way of putting it, was that he went to bat defending the civil rights of a mentally ill suspect whose testimony was ruled inadmissible as evidence; it essentially came down to Evans’ word (and the word of her police colleagues) against Dorner’s (and the few friends he’d made on the force), along with the incomplete testimony of nearby hotel witnesses. What began as whistleblowing turned into a trial on the character of a new recruit, Christopher Dorner, who now had to prove to the heavily-stacked Board of Rights that he hadn’t lied when he reported Evans for misconduct.

Speaking about this process, attorney Stormer told me, “I am 100% certain that the Board of Rights process is unfair.”

Stormer added, however, another giant caveat about Dorner that his adoring fans have been ignoring: “But this does raise another issue — that Dorner could’ve been the type who would’ve snapped as an officer on duty at any time.”