Daniel Shavers: The Video Doesn't Lie

Victim Daniel Shavers with his two daughters

Over the past few years, the rapid advancements in cell phone technology have led to an explosion in the number of people walking or driving around with video camera capability in their pockets.

Video footage from camera-equipped cell phones have brought some truly shocking examples of excessive use of force and overtly biased policing based on race by some members of law enforcement.

As have body-cams that are now required by a growing number of police departments in the U.S.

Unquestionably, two of the most egregious and chilling examples of deadly police overreaction caught on video in recent memory were the deaths of Eric Garner and Daniel Shavers (pictured above).

The victims in both cases were engaged in non-violent behavior that were minor low-level infractions at best, both men were married fathers, and neither of the officers who killed them (on videotape) faced any legal repercussions for taking the life of an innocent human being.

Let's review the facts of Shavers' death.

On Monday January 18, 2016, Shavers was on his stomach (per the orders of the police training guns on him) crying and pleading for officers not to kill him moments before he was shot and killed in the hallway of a hotel in Mesa, Arizona by former police officer Philip "Mitch" Brailsford.

A Granbury, Texas resident who worked for a pest control business, Shavers was in Mesa to kill some birds that had gotten inside a grocery store. After inviting two female acquaintances back to his room for drinks, at some point he showed them a pellet rifle with a scope mounted on it that he was planning to use to kill the birds for his job - which he was presumably going to do at night when customers weren't around.

Hotel guests hanging out at the pool below went to the front desk to report someone waving a gun in the window of a room up on the 5th floor of the hotel, and the Mesa PD were called.

Ex-Mesa police officer Philip "Mitch" Brailsford

When a group of tactical SWAT officers arrived and went to Shavers' room, he'd been drinking but told officers he wasn't intoxicated and willingly complied with their orders.

According to a detailed analysis of the incident by former FBI supervisory agent and St. John's University adjunct professor James Gagliano that was shared with CNN on Tuesday, a review of the full unedited body-cam footage that was released after Brailsford was acquitted (more on that in a moment) revealed that the commanding officer on the scene delivered a series of confusing and contradictory commands to Shavers.

Commands interlaced with needless threats that unnecessarily aggravated a tense situation.

Now the end is tough to watch, but I really want you to watch the body-cam footage for yourself; if you haven't already seen it - it's about five minutes in total.

Listen to the commanding officer's tone of voice and the way he talks to Shavers, watch how Shavers tries to comply with every command given to him; in fact he was complying with the officer's orders to crawl towards them when Brailsford suddenly opens fire with his AR-15 assault rifle and fatally shoots Shavers IN THE BACK five times.

As James Gagliano told CNN: "In a quarter-century of participating in and leading tactical resolution operations, I have never heard a law enforcement professional use such offensive -- almost taunting -- rhetoric. the vocal police officer tasked with directing the operation appeared hell-bent on baiting a confused but receptive and compliant subject into making a deadly mistake."

Click the link above to the right of Brailsford's photo to check out the full text of Gagliano's analysis of how the Mesa PD officer's actions led to the murder of a man in cold blood.

Eric Garner being choked to death on a Staten
Island sidewalk in 2014 - for selling loose cigarettes

And I don't use that term lightly.

To me there's no way to watch that unedited body cam footage, watch a terrified Shavers comply with everything the commanding officer asks him to do, listen to that officer repeatedly and intentionally goad Shavers - and then watch Brailsford fire five shots from an AR-15 assault rifle at point blank range - and not see it as murder.

An unarmed crying man crawling on his belly is a threat? Really?

By the way, two months after Shavers was killed the Mesa police department fired Brailsford for unsatisfactory performance and violations of department policy - including the fact that he had the words "YOU'RE FUCKED" etched into his AR-15.

While Brailsford is not the commanding officer heard yelling like a maniac on the body-cam footage, he was the one who pulled the trigger as a crying Shavers crawled toward the officers as he was told to do.

Last Thursday a jury acquitted Brailsford of all charges including second-degree manslaughter and what confuses me is the fact that Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sam Meyers granted a motion to seal the body-cam footage in spring of 2016 before the trial started.

To me the hardest part is that, like Eric Garner, Shavers is literally posing no threat whatsoever to the multiple officers who are around him - and like Garner, Shavers is pleading for his life.

It was just three years ago that Garner's death gained worldwide attention after NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo (who's still on active duty by the way) placed him in an illegal choke hold after the Staten Island father was confronted by a group of officers for selling loose cigarettes on the street.

NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo right after
choking Eric Garner on July 17, 2014

The disturbing video of Pantaleo calmly choking the life out of Garner as he repeatedly rasps, "I can't breathe, I can't breathe!" as three other officers hover over him is horrifying.

According to statements from eyewitnesses at the scene that were detailed in a recent book by journalist Matt Taibbi about Garner, his death and the failure to indict Pantaleo titled "I Can't Breathe: A Killing On Bay Street", as Garner struggled to breathe a woman ran up to Pantaleo and begged him to stop choking Garner.

He gestured to his gun and kept on choking the man.

The conduct of men like Mitch Brailsford and Daniel Pantaleo does not typify the professionalism demonstrated by thousands of law enforcement personnel who face difficult decisions every day.

But when the law is applied selectively and unevenly, whether it's a traffic stop or a chokehold, it undermines trust in the very institutions empowered to enforce those laws for the public good - and that, ironically, makes "good policing" harder for the thousands of cops who do it the right way.

Ultimately it's a sad statement of America's justice system that when the actions of men like Brailsford and Pantaleo do result in the unjustified deaths of innocent people, and municipal courts fail to hold them legally accountable for taking a human life - too often there is no remedy.

Time will tell though.

Even though Mitch Brailsford walked on second-degree manslaughter charges last week, he may very well still face federal charges for a flagrant violation of Daniel Shavers' civil rights - the same charges that resulted in former North Charleston PD officer Michael Slager being sentenced to 20 years for  fatally shooting unarmed U.S. Navy veteran Walter Scott in the back as he was running away from Slager on April 4, 2015.

Maybe that legal route will eventually lead to justice for Eric Garner and Daniel Shavers.

And some small measure of comfort for Garner's wife and their four children, and Shavers' wife and their two daughters.

After all, as I blogged about last Friday, sometimes the wheels of justice turn slowly - and in the end, the video doesn't lie.

Alton Sterling's Death - Use of Force Gone Wrong

Cameron Sterling & Quinyetta McMillan earlier today

Another July, yet another senseless death at the hands of overzealous police officers responding to a non-violent civil offense.

The world is once again stunned over video showing police officers killing a man who's already restrained on the ground.

Last night two officers from the Baton Rouge Police Department shot and killed 37-year old Alton Sterling after a confrontation escalated over, of all things, Sterling selling CD's outside of a small store. Not drugs or weapons. CD's.

Earlier today I listened to some audio excerpts from the press conference in Louisiana earlier this morning where Quinyetta McMillan, the mother of Alton Sterling's 15-year-old son Cameron, read a statement to the media about the impact of Sterling's death.

If you haven't heard it, McMillan read her statement with remarkable composure, but it was difficult to concentrate on her words with the sound of Sterling's son Cameron crying softly as he tried to cover his face (pictured above), watching this child, clearly traumatized over watching video of his father's violent death, brought this incident into a human perspective.

While preliminary reports indicate police responded to the scene based on a 911 call from what media reports have described as "an anonymous caller" reporting an armed man, during her press conference this morning Quinyetta McMillan insisted Alton Sterling was simply selling CD's.

Thus far there's no definitive evidence that Sterling had a gun or attempted to point it at the two officers who had him pinned to the ground.

Judge for yourself, if you watch the cell phone video taken at the scene by a horrified bystander, Sterling is standing by the front of the car arguing with the police officers, but there's nothing in his hand, nor is he threatening them with any kind of weapon.

While an investigation is just getting started, and all the facts are not yet known, the parallels between this case and the death of Eric Garner two years ago on July 17, 2104, are disturbingly similar.

Alton Sterling

Two heavyset African-American men, fathers of children with families, engaged in selling items of relatively little value to make a few bucks being confronted by white police officers who somehow escalate a remarkably minor civil infraction to the point that they feel the use of deadly force is justified.  

Eric Garner was selling loose cigarettes on a street in Staten Island in the neighborhood where he lived.

After members of the NYPD confronted and attempted to arrest Garner, officer Daniel Pantaleo placed Garner in an illegal choke-hold even as he was already on the ground being restrained by other officers, rendering him unconscious - minutes later he was dead.

Despite the video evidence, a grand jury declined to press charges, Daniel Pantaleo is working the streets of New York as a police officer as you read this.

It's way too early to tell what the outcome of this case will be as far as the two officers being held responsible for Sterling's death, but a federal investigation is underway.

Baton Rouge PD officer Blane Salamoni 

But there were Justice Department investigations into the death of Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin and Freddie Gray too - thus far no one was held legally responsible for their deaths.

The two officers have been identified as Howie Lake, II and Blane Salamoni (pictured left), and it is interesting to note that the New York Times reports that Salamoni's father Noel Salamoni is a captain of special operations on the Baton Rouge police force.

As I've often said in far too many entries on this blog, at some point this country needs undertake a serious examination into what is going on inside the minds of police officers who are so quick to resort to the use of deadly force in situations that don't warrant it.

Especially when the victim is a person of color in a nation in which entrenched racial bias in policing is a problem in police departments across the country.

It's hard to watch, but take a close look at that cell phone video, watch the officer nearest to the camera remove his handgun from his holster even as he's on top of Sterling.

Obviously I can't understand what was going on in his mind at that moment before Sterling was fatally shot in the chest and the back, but viewed from the standpoint of a civilian who has seen too many of these videos, did he think his life was threatened by a man already pinned to the ground by two officers?

Or did the race of Alton Sterling unconsciously make him seem more of a threat than he actually was in the mind of the man who shot him?

As in many things, perception is everything, but in this case, from what we know so far, it seems perception was the difference between life and death.

A Very Disgruntled Crew

New York PBA President Patrick Lynch

Clearly many members of law enforcement in America are just not feeling the love these days.

Just ask Patrick Lynch (pictured left), the perpetually disgruntled and opinionated President of the New York Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, whose highly public divisive tirades against Mayor Bill DeBlasio have begun to rankle members of the NYPD, who believe his partisan petty feuds with everyone from the mayor to local activists reflect a tendency to place his own interests ahead of a membership that is growing tired of his confrontation-driven autocratic leadership style.

In all fairness to the many dedicated police officers in communities around the nation who take their oath to protect and serve seriously (and sometimes risk their lives to do so) we as a society too often place them in impossible situations that are not always "law enforcement issues"; thrusting them into the difficult position of having to balance the role of sociologist, psychologist, babysitter, mediator, savior, protector or soldier. 

In light of the many high-profile cases of excessive use of force or unjustified killings by police spotlighted in mainstream and social media, it begs the question: do we ask too much of police?

Are the politicians and government officials responsible for appropriating funds and approving budgets placing too much of the burden to solve society's problems on police forces?

The palpable deterioration of race relations, civil rights and voting rights, coupled with the growing income gap, stagnant wages for the 99% and chronic under-employment / unemployment that has negatively impacted the US since 1980 (and worsened since the Republican party allowed itself to be hijacked by maniacally partisan extremist ideologues in the early 1990's) are issues that are far too complex to be simply laid at the feet of police.

But far too often, the socioeconomic byproducts of these issues, like poverty, shrinking social services, under-serving public schools and a dysfunctional justice system, end up on the plates of local law enforcement when something (or someone) finally gives; and someone dials 911.

In some cases, the all-too human police officer(s) responding to emergencies don't have the time, patience, experience, training, or emotional control to deescalate a tense situation; or determine whether someone is a danger to themselves, the public, or the officer.

If you read this blog you know I'm one of those citizens who holds police officers to a much higher standard, but in all honesty if we pull up to a curb at night and there's a crazy-looking shirtless guy holding a knife who's yelling to himself; how do you know he's schizophrenic and off his meds, or on a three-day meth bender?

In all fairness to police officers, it is really a cop's responsibility because someone is off his meds and not getting adequate treatment for mental illness? Is it a cop's responsibility that someone has a meth addiction? Where does society's responsibility lie in this age of shrinking social services and Republican politicians in Washington who rail against unions (including police unions) and "Big Government"?

12 year-old Tamir Rice, shot dead in a park last November

Let's imagine the perfect world for a minute.

In that scenario maybe the city of Cleveland has more tax revenue coming in from a workforce that's more gainfully employed, earning wages that are actually pegged to the cost of living, resulting in sufficient municipal funding for an adequate number of properly staffed rec enters and adult-supervised after-school programs for children so 12 year-old Tamir Rice might've had a different option than pacing aimlessly around the park area outside of the Cudell Recreation Center in Cleveland on a cold snowy day on November, 22, 2014 playing with a plastic toy gun.

In that perfect world a poorly-trained 26 year-old Cleveland police officer like Timothy Loehmann with a sketchy record who'd already been dismissed from a municipal police force for being incompetent (and hadn't been properly vetted by CPD's underfunded human resource department) doesn't have cause to drive up and shoot 12 year-old Rice in the torso for doing what 12 year-old American boys have been doing since the 19th century; hanging around outside playing with a fake gun - because maybe Rice would instead be inside a well-funded community recreation center under the supervision of an adult teaching him something productive. 

In a perfect world maybe the economy in Staten Island is better and Eric Garner has a decent job that pays him a living wage so that he doesn't have to wander around the streets selling "loosie" cigarettes for a buck apiece to help support his family; so a group of NYPD cops charged with enforcing a "broken windows" policy don't have to roll up on Garner and arrest him for a minor "quality of life" infraction so he doesn't end up in an illegal choke hold that suffocates the life out of him on the street.

But obviously we're not in a perfect world and lately it seems like there a lot of former police officers appearing on television to complain about the shrinking stature of the American police officer.

Case in point: last Monday evening when I was on the treadmill at the gym watching a debate during a segment on Out Front with Erin Burnett on the recent spike in gun violence in New York and some other major US cities.

The opposing guests were former White House nominee and social activist Van Jones, and a former member of the NYPD who seems to be CNN's latest go-to-guy "Contributor" when they need an outspoken beefy-looking ex-NYPD cop with a New York accent who will pretty much defend anything any cop does and vilify people who peacefully protest excessive use of force by cops.

I can't recall his name but he's got dark hair, says everything with an annoying ingratiating smirk on his face and looks like a character out of 'Goodfellas' or 'The Sopranos'.

It's not Thomas Verni (pictured left), the former NYPD officer who's also a frequent "Contributor" on CNN who caused a stir recently
when he posted a tragic story on his Facebook page about a 14 year-old kid / gang member who was shot and killed on his way to school.

Not long after that, three former members of the NYPD began posting comments on Verni's Facebook page that basically trashed the kid's reputation and blamed him for his own death. (No mention of lax American gun control laws of course.)

Ex-NYPD cop Brian Charles, who in response to the story on Verni's Facebook page about the 14 year-old wrote: "Fuck him. He would have wound up killing someone eventually or wound up in jail. Saved taxpayers a lot of money."

Too bad officer Charles still isn't driving around urban neighborhoods with his gun, badge and that massive chip on his shoulder; I'm sure we'd be so much safer.

At least Verni's a bit more measured and informative than ex-NYPD detective (and yes, CNN "Contributor") Harry Houck (pictured left) who recently got into an on-air shouting match with Marc Lamont Hill back in April over the staggering number of deaths of black men and boys at the hands of the Baltimore Police Department.


Anyway, back to the Van Jones and the other CNN contributor "ex-NYPD guy-whose-name-I-can't-remember" debate on Erin Burnett on Monday afternoon.

Even though the CNN producers probably told him to express the "police officer's perspective" for the segment, the ex-NYPD guy's simplistic Fox News-like approach irked me.

Van Jones is a lawyer (Yale Law School) who was appointed as Special Adviser for Green Jobs to the White House Council on Environmental Quality in 2009 before a Republican smear campaign forced him to resign his position.

He's intelligent, articulate and used reason and facts to make his point that the statistics showing increases in gun violence were being taken out of context by some people and that such increases alone do not invalidate the peaceful nationwide movements calling for police reform, more comprehensive reviews of excessive use of violence by some police; and calls for independent prosecutors to be assigned in cases of police brutality.  

The ex-NYPD guy kept trying to use the statistics showing a rise in gun violence to prove that cops are now "hesitant" to do their jobs in high-crime areas because of the nation-wide backlash against the unchecked use of excessive police force.

As if peaceful protests, demands for better policing and reforms of America's dysfunctional justice system are in themselves, causing increased violence. It was a weak argument considering that more balanced analysis shows that the bulk of the gun violence increases in New York for instance are taking place between gang members in very specific neighborhoods.

CNN's 'Out Front' host Erin Burnett

What irked me about Erin Burnett's questions, which were obviously intended to throw some gas on this debate, was how she asked Van Jones to comment on one of ex-NYPD guy's points then played a short video clip of a small group of black protesters walking down a street yelling some hard to discern anti-cop slogans.

She offered no context to the video clip, no date of when it shot, where it was taken, or what specific incident had sparked the comments.

It was as if she'd offered up the clip as "proof" that all black people are "anti-cop" and that such protests are a direct cause of the spike in gun violence around the nation.

I don't mean to belabor the point, I guess it just got under my skin because the issue of deteriorating police relationships and mistrust with the communities they serve warranted a more rational and balanced response from law enforcement than the ex-NYPD guy she brought on to spar with Jones.

Her interview style can at times be annoyingly chirpy and urgent. As a former television reporter, I sometimes feel like she's staring at a ticking clock behind the camera and is waiting to tick off her points rather than engage in more thoughtful questions.

I have nothing against her but personally I've never been a real big Erin Burnett fan; and I've always been sort of mystified as to why she got the time slot and the show in the first place.

I certainly don't want to come off as dismissively sexist and suggest it's her model-like looks, because she's obviously intelligent and has a quick mind; I guess it's just her style and personae that doesn't click with me.

Besides, CNN has a lot of intelligent female anchors I respect and go out of my way to watch; including Candy Crowley and Dana Bash for their excellent coverage and analysis of politics.

As far as CNN goes, personally I think Brooke Baldwin is a far superior interviewer who's much more natural and instinctual with guests. To me Erin Burnett always seems like she's taking a test that she's determined not to fail.

That said, I'm making an effort to try and understand what police officers are so upset about; particularly all these ex-NYPD guys serving as contributors on CNN.

I lived in New York City during 911 and I remember how people heaped adulation, affection and sympathy upon NYPD officers for months after the Towers came down; even though it was the tail end of the Giuliani era when relations between black New Yorkers and the NYPD were at an all-time low. Any cop in a bar back then could not buy a drink because everyone wanted to buy them one; or several - I know, I was a bartender in an Irish bar on Amsterdam Avenue & 80th street on the Upper West Side and I served plenty of them myself.

When I first moved to Manhattan in the late 90's the papers were full of horrific stories of innocent African-Americans and black New Yorker's killed (Amadou Diallo, Patrick Dorismond) or sadistically abused (Abner Louima) by members of the NYPD.

When 911 happened on September 11, 2001, it sort of had the affect of rehabilitating their public image in the city to a degree. Watching some of these ex-NYPD guys on CNN, I wonder if some of them are having a hard time wrapping their minds around the level of national opposition and outrage at some of the tactics and incidents that have garnered global headlines and tarnished the reputation of the NYPD and other municipal police forces in Ferguson, Chicago, Los Angeles, Cleveland and elsewhere.

Listening to some of these guys on television, they seem genuinely confused at the level of public outrage over the killings of completely innocent people who are unarmed; as if such things are simply part of "the job" and not to be scrutinized by the public police are sworn to protect.

The prevalence and instantaneous nature of social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram along with the reality that almost everyone is now armed with a functioning video camera in their cell phone has forever altered that ability of police to simply slip behind the Blue Wall of silence to avoid public scrutiny of actions that are illegal - or mistakes that turn deadly.

Police have operated that way for a long time in this nation but now technology is altering that faster than their policy and training can keep up with.

The uncomfortable reality is that if it weren't for cell phone video, Eric Garner's death in Staten Island or Freddie Gray's death in police custody in Baltimore would never even have resulted in an indictment of an officer let alone a trial.

Technology and the Internet have had the effect of making policing in America almost like professional sports in the sense that now almost everything they do is seen on some kind of camera; whether it's a dashboard camera mounted in the police vehicle, a CCTV mounted on the street, a bystander on the street with a cell phone, or increasingly, cameras mounted on officers themselves.

The Blue Wall of Silence can no longer shield the actions of police officers as it once did in this country and technology is having the partial effect of eroding the sense of invincibility that so many cops talk about having.

They are being forced to come to grips with the reality that they are not simply licensed to kill like James Bond.

Citizens, journalists and activists are no longer waiting for the Federal Government to create a comprehensive database of police killings in the United States; as I mentioned in my blog about the Oklahoma Highway Patrol's killing of Pastor Nehemiah Fischer on Monday, multiple organizations are now keeping and gathering much more detailed statistics on police killings, leaving American law enforcement under greater public scrutiny than they've ever been before.

To borrow a phrase from writer Flannery O'Connor's December 9, 1956 letter to J.F. Powers, these days American police are "a very disgruntled crew" indeed.

Ex-NYPD Officer Weighs In On Murder of Two Policeman & Aftermath of Eric Garner Decision

Slain NYPD officers Rafael Ramos (left) & Liu Wenjin (right)

A good friend of mine from high school whom I'll call "KC", was a New York City Police officer for nine years.

We've been tight for about 26 years and I'd been looking forward to attending a holiday party held at his girlfriend's home this past Saturday night to get his take on the repercussions of a Staten Island jury's failure to indict NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo for the choke-hold death of Eric Garner.

KC is pretty plain-spoken and over the years we've had numerous discussions about police behavior and the use of excessive force as it relates to African-American citizens.

When I got to the party at about 6pm, the news was just unfolding that Ismmaiyl Brinsley, a disturbed 28 year-old African-American man from Baltimore apparently shot his girlfriend in the stomach (wounding her), then traveled up to New York City where he shot and killed two innocent uniformed NYPD officers who were sitting inside their marked police cruiser in the Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn.  

Just hours before officers Rafael Ramos and Liu Wenjin were both shot at close range, Brinsley posted this chilling threat on social media: "I'm putting wings on pigs today. They take 1 of ours, let's take 2 of theirs,"

His cold-blooded murder of two police officers was a heinous act.

But it's also disturbing that the language of his ominous message is deeply divisive at an already-fragile time in America when communities across the country are divided over the disproportionate use of excessive and deadly force against men and boys of color; and the lack of accountability for those members of law enforcement who commit such acts.

President Obama, New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio, the Attorney General Eric Holder, as well as the families of both Eric Garner and Michael Brown have all categorically condemned the brutal murder of officers Wenjin and Ramos through public statements.

While the violent act of a lone individual has nothing to do with the thousands and thousands of protesters across America who have participated in peaceful marches to protest the epidemic of unchecked police brutality, conservative defenders of the status-quo area already using this crime to distort the legitimate protest movement and blame Democratic leaders for the attack.

In the wake of the incident, the reactionary leader of the NYPD's Patrolman's Benevolent Association (PBA) Patrick Lynch wasted no time blaming Mayor DeBlasio, publicly making the absurd suggestion that, "blood on the hands starts on the steps of City Hall in the office of the mayor."     

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani wasted no time appearing on Fox News Sunday to tread the worn conservative path of blaming President Obama for spreading anti-cop "propaganda" that motivated Brinsely to shoot the two officers before launching into a lecture on black-on-black crime.

But even Giuliani admitted that Patrick Lynch's inflammatory comments blaming the mayor for the murders "goes too far." 

Even though data shows that the vast majority of people who kill cops are white, the usual suspects of right wing media are busy spreading a distorted narrative linking peaceful protests and widespread calls for reforms in community policing to the actions of one disturbed lone gunman who happens to be black and invoked the name of Eric Garner and Michael Brown before murdering two innocent police officers then killing himself.

At the party this past Saturday night, my friend KC, a jovial red-headed former cop who remains close to many members of law enforcement, was clearly outraged about the killings of Ramos and Liu, but he was measured in his response.

When I asked him about the protests surrounding the failure to indict Daniel Pantaleo for choking Eric Garner, he was quick to point out that the officers were only trying to do their job when they arrested Garner. Policemen don't respond to any incident wanting to kill someone.

KC was troubled over the incident because from his perspective as a former NYPD officer who's been in numerous situations where suspects resist arrest, had Garner simply obeyed the commands of the officers to submit to being handcuffed and arrested; he would have been released from jail fairly quickly considering the charges were simply for selling loose cigarettes - a charge he'd been arrested for on numerous occasions.

But what about his being arrested for such a minor infraction in the first place? I asked him.

The relative seriousness of a charge, in KC's view, is not the primary concern when officers approach and arrest a suspect. From an officer's perspective, if the law is on the books, they are there to enforce it; and if necessary, perform an arrest. But they're not going to debate the merits of a law, it's not their job.

KC reminded me that even the video of the arrest showing Garner being placed in a choke hold can distort the facts of what happened.

If an officer places someone under arrest, that person must submit. If the person resists, fights or attempts to flee, police are authorized by law to use physical means to take the person into custody.

KC says police are not just going to stand there while a person or suspect debates why an arrest is not warranted; they're going to do their job.

From KC's standpoint, the police were simply doing their job in Staten Island when Garner was arrested, and it was Garner who jeopardized his own safety by resisting arrest.

But was the choke hold really necessary? I asked him, noting that there were four or five other officers standing there at the time and that Garner was already on the ground.

KC said he's had to use choke holds on suspects before, but it's the kind of technique an officer resorts to only after repeated commands are ignored, or a suspect continues to engage in a physical struggle that could place the officers in harm's way.   

I'm not sure I totally agreed with that, especially since choke holds seem to be disproportionately used on black and Latino suspects; but I listened to his explanation and it did help me to better understand the mindset of those officers on Staten Island.

It's important to note that KC has helped me to try and resolve issues with the police in the past; especially during an ID theft situation in the early 2000's where a criminal had stolen my ID and I was being stopped by police in New Jersey because they mistakenly thought I was the criminal.

KC was in agreement that the Garner situation was very different than the case of Akai Gurley, the 28 year-old innocent black man who was shot by a rookie NYPD police officer in the darkened stairwell of a Brooklyn housing project a few weeks ago.

He felt that case was a serious breakdown in decision-making, tactics, training and oversight - and that there should be repercussions for the officer responsible for taking the fatal shot; and for entering the stairwell of a building with his gun drawn for no reason in the first place.

KC was also clear that the death of 12 year-old Tamir Rice in Cleveland was also a breakdown of monumental proportions as well given that officers are trained to maintain a distance of around 30 feet from any suspect holding a weapon - there is no scenario in which police are trained to pull up to a scene less than ten feet from someone holding a gun and simply shoot him.

But KC, like many current police officers in New York and other cities and towns in America, are well aware that the number of high profile killings of innocent, unarmed African-Americans has reached a critical point and that something is going to have to change.

As is evidenced by the announcement today that former Milwaukee police officer Christopher Manney was justified in fatally shooting a 31 year-old schizophrenic homeless African-American man named Dontre Hamilton 14 times in a park back on April 30th of this year.

Our nation needs that change desperately.

KC, like others in this country confused about what's going on with community-police relations these days, doesn't have a specific answer as to what that change would look like; but he thinks revised training and oversight for police is essential.

He also believes some kind of community awareness or education is needed for young kids as well.

I agree that it's a shared responsibility. One that must begin with awareness and dialog.

Let's hope that dialog isn't drowned out by the reactionary voices of the Patrick Lynchs and Rudy Giulianis on one side - and the tiny fraction of protesters chanting for cops to be killed on the other.

Real change has to come from within. And it has to take place on the middle-ground where people can come together and find common cause.

Rumain Brisbon Shot & Killed By Phoenix PD Officer

Rumain Brisbon holding one of his children

There's a deadly epidemic in America that's got nothing to do with disease.

Even as the family and friends of Akai Gurley (an innocent unarmed man shot in an apartment stairwell by a rookie NYPD cop) prepare for his funeral in Brown Memorial Church in Clinton Hill, Brooklyn tomorrow, the epidemic has claimed another victim. 

While protests continue around the country over the failure of a Staten Island grand jury to indict NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo for Eric Garner's death, another unarmed black man has been shot and killed by a member of law enforcement.

This time by a 30 year-old Phoenix Arizona police officer with seven years on the force whose name has not yet been released.

34 year-old Rumain Brisbon, a married father of four, was inside a parked black Cadillac SUV in an apartment complex in North Phoenix when the officer approached the vehicle in response to a report of someone selling drugs from the vehicle.

According to Brandon Dickerson, a man who was sitting inside the SUV with Brisbon just before the incident, Brisbon was there to drop off some fast food to his children; he claims that Brisbon never raised his voice to the officer.

Brisbon was alone in the vehicle when the officer asked him to get out and raise his hands. Brisbon fled, running into an apartment building. The officer gave chase and a struggle ensued in a hallway.

According to an official statement from the Phoenix PD, Brisbon was reaching in his pocket during the struggle and when he ignored the officer's repeated commands to take his hand out of his pockets; the officer reached for Brisbon's hands and thought he felt a gun - so he fired two shots into Brison's chest, killing him.

Turns out the only thing he had in his pocket was a bottle of oxycodone pills.

Rumain Brisbon wasn't perfect. He had convictions for burglary, marijuana possession and DUI on his record. He'd even been shot before. Clearly he should have heeded the police officer's command to raise his hands when ordered to do so and there's no question he should never have tried to flee from the officer or get into a physical struggle with him.

But given all of that, did it really warrant two gunshots to the chest?

It's impossible for me to put myself in the officer's shoes in that situation, and it wouldn't be fair for me to judge whether or not he felt his life was in danger. But the refrain is all too familiar, an officer "felt fear" and his instinct was to squeeze the trigger of a loaded handgun.

What did the officer fear? Brisbon ran into a building; why not call for backup if he was afraid?

Rancher Clive Bundy broke federal laws - alive, well and free.

In all fairness to the officer, Rumain Brisbon did resist arrest.

But then so did Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy (pictured left) - and he was most definitely well-armed when he actively resisted arrest earlier this spring.

In fact he had a whole posse of anti-government nut bags armed to the teeth who were with him.

Hell, he even held daily press conferences with the media; remember his enlightening thoughts on "the Negro"?

No law enforcement officer ran onto the ranch and tried to subdue him; and they certainly didn't shoot him in the chest or anywhere else for that matter even though Bundy had clearly broken federal law.

Rumain Brisbon had some oxycodone pills in his pocket and was simply under suspicion of having been selling them, then he resisted arrest; neither of which are capital offenses.

The sad truth? We have two separate justice systems in this country, which one you get depends on what color your skin happens to be when the cops show up, or stop you on the road or street.

You have to say this about Ebola, it's deadly but at least it has a cure and can be prevented.

The same can't be said for the epidemic that killed Rumain Brison, Eric Garner, Akai Gurley, 12 year-old Tamir Rice and so many others. And will again soon if we don't find a cure.

  

No Indictment for Daniel Pantaleo - Cleveland.com Blames Tamir Rice's Parents For Rookie Cop's Fatal Mistake

Grand Central Station 5:33pm - protesters react to no indictment for Pantaleo

'No reasonable cause to bring charges' is becoming a painfully familiar refrain in this nation.

Listening live to New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio's press conference in the aftermath of the failure of the Staten Island grand jury to indict NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo for the choking death of Eric Garner, like many I was left marveling at the sheer magnitude of the dysfunction in our nation's justice system.

While a special grand jury comprised of 23 residents of Staten Island would not indict a cop for using an illegal choke hold that killed a man arrested for selling loose cigarettes, a different Staten Island grand jury did manage to indict Ramsey Ortiz on a shaky gun possession charge - Ortiz is the 22 year-old Hispanic man who filmed the now-famous video of police arresting and killing Eric Garner.

Think about that for a moment.

Since the founding of this country it's been painfully obvious to the nation and the world that not only does the US justice system target and treat people very differently depending on the race and ethnicity of the accused, but now, even in 2014, it's becoming glaringly obvious that there are no meaningful legal repercussions for members of American law enforcement who kill unarmed black men - even innocent people like Amadou Diallo, or more recently in Brooklyn, Akai Gurley.

With each failure of local prosecutors to hold police officers accountable for the taking of human life, the growing racial gap in this nation widens.

These decisions by prosecutors and the courts have the perverse effect of actually energizing conservative Americans who are highly susceptible to the hysteria, bigotry and hatred intentionally generated by right wing media in order to 'divide and conquer' their voter base.

Bizarre hyper-conservative radio host Laura Ingraham's absurd comments about protesters earlier today on her show offer a textbook example.

The Real Ugly American: Right-wing hate radio host Laura Ingraham

Ingraham was pandering to the fears of her audience over the growing protest movement springing up in cities and communities across the nation.

A listener who sounded like Archie Bunker was on the line suggesting that the average "Joe Six-Pack" (media code for angry working-class Republican white guys) like himself would begin coming out onto the streets to confront protesters.

Ingraham disagreed with her conservative caller, suggesting that "our people" won't be coming out to protest because they're "working and have families to support."

Take a moment to listen to the brief clip of the segment of her comments that were posted on MediaMatters.org; listen to the casual tone with which she says it.

Her barely concealed bigotry is laced with common ignorant assumptions. While she suggests that only unemployed black people with no work ethic who don't care about their families have taken to the streets to protest the unchecked use of lethal force by police, take a look at the photo above taken in Grand Central Station on the east side of Manhattan at 5:33pm this evening by a Twitter user - that looks like a pretty diverse group of protesters to me. 

Laura Ingraham asserting to a live radio audience that "our people" (and we know who she means by that...) don't take part in their Constitutional right to protest is as absurd as it is irresponsible.

Perhaps she was in a coma during the spring and summer of 2010 when thousands of mostly white Tea Party activists filled town halls, parks and streets to voice their opposition to the idea of all Americans having access to affordable health care.

Or maybe Ingraham was simply on a different planet in late May of 2010 when a large crowd of Tea Party protesters angered at the Affordable Care Act lined up outside the US Capitol building and hurled obscenities including the word "nigger" at Georgia Congressman and civil rights icon John Lewis and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus as they emerged from meetings.

The fact that the original Boston Tea Party for which the Koch brother's faux-politcal movement derives it's name was in fact, a riot likely slipped her mind too.

Now I'm really trying to stay on point here, but Ingraham's comments are important to note as they demonstrate the kind of base level ignorance that underlies today's conservative movement with its elevation of warped perception, ignorance, narrow-minded ideology and opinions over facts and truth - but it's typical of the divisive brand of offensive vile that spews out of her mouth on any given day.

When the American court system continually fails to indict law enforcement officers for taking the lives of African-American boys and men in cases where lethal force is clearly not necessary or called for, it serves to reinforce sub-conscious beliefs about the perceived inferiority or violence of people of color.

It lends legitimacy to the deeply ingrained bigotry etched in the minds of people like Ingraham. 

It also sanctions the troubling view of some Americans that the lives of people of color matter less in this nation - some of those Americans are media executives, publishers and journalists too.

12 year-old police shooting victim Tamir Rice

Personally, my vote for the 'Andrew Brietbart Journalism Award' winner this week goes to Cleveland.com (the online media partner of the Cleveland Plain Dealer) for their November 26th expose on the parents of Tamir Rice (pictured left); the 12 year-old boy who was shot and killed by a rookie police officer in a Cleveland park two seconds after he and his partner arrived at the scene in a police car.

As an article by Eric Boehlert on MediaMatters.org reported yesterday, Cleveland.com included a photo of a mug shot of the slain child's father in the November 26th article that was supposedly about the shooting of the child by rookie police officer Timothy Loehmann.

A different article on November 24th detailed a drug charge against Rice's mother from 2013 for which she was sentenced to probation.

Boehlert reported that numerous readers, media experts and even some employees of the Cleveland Plain Dealer expressed confusion as to what any criminal or court records of Tamir Rice's parents had to do with a rookie Cleveland police officer gunning down their child while he was playing in the park.  

As Boehlert's article states: "Depicting black/brown boys and men as violent criminals from poor upbringing is an established media narrative that Tamir didn't quite fit. But Cleveland.com, the website of the city's former paper of record, tried to make him fit into the narrow narrative anyway, by reporting on the criminal misdeeds of his parents instead," wrote former Plain Dealer reporter and columnist Afi Scruggs. "It's an old, but tired trick used by the news media, especially when it comes to a black or brown person being killed by law enforcement."

As Mayor DeBlasio noted during his emotional and personal comments earlier this evening, it's past time that people awaken to the fact that this is an American problem - not just a black or white one.

Prosecutors and police must begin to recognize that if reasonable cause exists to bring charges in the case of a wrongful death, then charges must be brought; regardless of the race of the victim.

I can't put myself in the room with the 23 members of the special grand jury in Staten Island who found no cause to bring charges against officer Daniel Pantaleo.

But for an average reasonable citizen, for anyone who's watched the disturbing video of Eric Garner desperately pleading, "I can't breathe, I can't breathe!" while Pantaleo holds his neck in a vice grip and four or five other cops secure him, I think most people would come to the conclusion that it was reasonable that the officer had to bear some measure of responsibility for Garner's death in a court of law.

After all, it's not like Daniel Pantaleo was breaking up an armed robbery or arresting a murderer - Eric Garner's only crime was selling some loose cigarettes.

That and being a larger than average black man on a street in America.
  

Broken Windows, Broken System - Daniel Pantaleo's Arrest Record Reveals Wildly Distorted Policing Policy

Officer Daniel Pantaleo after choking (& killing) Eric Garner in Staten Island

Analysis of records of the 259 arrests made by NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo, who was caught on video applying an illegal choke hold during an arrest that led to Eric Garner's death, calls into question the very existence of the NYPD's "Broken Windows" policing policy.

Records show that a mere 24 of Pantaleo's 259 arrests were actually for serious felony crimes.

The bulk of his arrests are for very minor infractions like marijuana possession, loitering, obstructing traffic, selling loose cigarettes and of course, resisting arrest. If his record is a sample of a typical NYPD patrol officer, what does that say about Broken Windows and the thousands of people being shuttled into New York City's penal system?

The basic theory of Broken Windows follows a simple premise: by focusing police resources and manpower on lower-level offenses that directly impact quality of life, much more serious felony offenses like rape, robbery, assault and murder would in turn be reduced.

But is the enforcement itself triggering horrific felonies far beyond the petty offenses that often trigger violent confrontations between police and (mostly) minority suspects? WNYC reporter Robert Lewis explored that question in an excellent piece back in July.

The Broken Windows policy was a hallmark of the Rudy Giuliani-era when NYPD officers began to crack down hard on things like overly aggressive squeegee guys approaching idling vehicles, cleaning windshields then demanding change for the unsolicited service.

The NYPD also stopped graffiti artists from tagging trains, subway stations and walls; in conjunction with city ordinances they made it harder for kids to buy spray paint (and box cutters) from hardware stores. Fare-jumpers who hopped subway turn styles, or people drinking from open containers of alcohol in public also drastically dropped. They even started harassing food cart vendors.

The policy continued under the Bloomberg administration. 

But as the arrest statistics piled up almost exclusively for young men of color, as did the staggering number of totally innocent citizens caught up in the wide net that Broken Windows cast, the Constitutionality of "Stop and Frisk" (a core element of Broken Windows policing strategy) became a much larger legal issue. Now it's an ugly stain on the legacy of the Bloomberg administration.

In light of the national attention focused on Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson's fatal shooting of unarmed teenager Michael Brown over the summer, Eric Garner's death from Daniel Pantaleo's illegal choke hold during an encounter in Staten Island (resulting from Garner's arrest for selling loose cigarettes to people on the street) became more than just business as usual for the NYPD.

The encounter was filmed by a bystander and went viral, placing the policy of Broken Windows squarely into the spotlight of global media scrutiny.

Disturbing facts about Pantaleo have emerged as witnesses from some of his 259 arrests have stepped forward with alarming details of his treatment of suspects.

Back on August 2nd the NY Daily News ran a piece on 43 year-old Tommy Rice, a welder who was stopped, strip-searched and falsely arrested (along with three other passengers in a car) in Staten Island by Pantaleo and another officer back in March of 2012.

Rice was eventually awarded $30,000 from the city after it was shown Pantaleo mocked and insulted Rice during the strip search by slapping his genitals. Where do you find that technique in the NYPD manual?

Earlier today NPR ran a feature and interview about another African-American who was falsely arrested by Pantaleo in Staten Island after the rogue cop stopped him and a friend on the street while they were taking an old boiler to a scrap yard for cash.

Pantaleo accused the man of stealing the boiler even though he explained that it had come from his girlfriend's mother's home and had been given to him. Pantaleo arrested him anyway; further clogging the New York City court system by charging the guy with obstructing traffic for pushing the boiler along the street in a shopping cart.

Obviously Garner's death was a ruled a homicide, but should we really blame Pantaleo? What about the system that put him back out on the street as a cop? Clearly the guy is no brain surgeon, but he's only enforcing the existing laws on the city's books.

What's becoming painfully clear is that Pantaleo is just one cog in a damaged machine and a symptom of a broken system.

If you want evidence of just how broken the system is, last week Sarah Ryley published the findings of some truly unsettling analysis by the NY Daily News. Look for yourself as these startling statistics showing the disproportionate rate at which Hispanics and Blacks are issued summonses for low-level offenses in New York.

Take for example the Upper West Side (North) in Manhattan, where, according to Ryley's Daily News article, blacks and Hispanics make up 34% of the population - yet they account for 84% of the summonses issued by the NYPD.

As Ryley's article states: "The analysis also found blacks and Hispanics received the vast majority of summonses for scores of common offenses, such as disorderly conduct (88%), loitering (89%), spitting (92%) and failure to have a dog license (91%) — even though the Health Department estimates that less than 17% of dogs citywide are licensed."

Those numbers are startling. If you consider the amount of revenue those summonses generate for the city, one might conclude the Broken Windows policy essentially amounts to a city tax on the behavior of black and Hispanic citizens.

Or perhaps Broken Windows policing serves the more sinister goal of offering NYPD officers the option of being able to criminalize virtually anything a person of color is doing in New York; walking an unlicensed dog, spitting on the sidewalk, having some weed in their pocket - any of which their white counterparts are also doing on any given day in Park Slope, the Village, Williamsburg or DUMBO.

I lived in New York for 15 years, I know that's true. By the way it's common knowledge that you can walk into almost any corner Bodega and by a "loosie" (a single cigarette) in case you just want a quick smoke and don't want to shell out ten bucks for a pack, strange that Pantaleo would arrest Eric Garner for doing it on the street in Staten Island.

Stranger still that Pantaleo would put him in a choke hold and end Garner's life for doing it.

But when viewed in the larger context of the numbers cited in the Daily News analysis, an officer like Daniel Pantaleo actually makes sense - a policy like Broken Windows can only function when you have officers like him to do the dirty work.

Dirty work indeed.