|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Attorneys for the family of a man shot and killed by police during a confrontation outside a Pleasanton auto dealership earlier this month have accused the city’s police department of covering up the facts of the shooting.
In a statement prepared by the Los Angeles law firm Geragos & Geragos, the department is accused of of inconsistencies in its accounts of the shooting and obstruction in responding to questions about the case.
Pleasanton police are withholding comments until Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley and her department complete their investigation of the case.
However, Mark Geragos and his firm issued another of several press releases disputing an account of the shooting death of 19-year-old John Deming Jr. by Officer Daniel Kunkel. disputing the police department’s account of the July 5 confrontation outside Specialty Sales Classics, a car dealership at 4321 First St.
Initial police accounts said that 19-year-old John Deming Jr. was
found outside the dealership when police arrived at about 2 a.m., Geragos states in his press release, but notes that a revised account said he was inside but visible through the dealership’s large glass windows.
Geragos said police dispatch records indicate that only 22 seconds passed between officers entering the business and Deming being shot. He said it is impossible for the confrontation
as described to have lasted only 22 seconds.
The law firm has accused police of inconsistent statements in this regard, at first saying the incident was captured on video but later saying it was not.
The firm’s attorneys said the police department then started a campaign of “character assassination” against Deming, searching his mother’s home for evidence of drugs and burglaries. During the search, officers handcuffed his mother and held her at gunpoint while refusing to tell her where her son was. The attorneys also said Pleasanton police attempted to interrogate Deming’s grandmother and recent barbecue guests to the family’s home.
Geragos said the family retained his firm shortly after the shooting, adding that the firm has represented
numerous celebrity clients, including Chris Brown and Michael Jackson.
According to Geragos, the family has also retained an independent forensic pathologist who conducted an autopsy on Deming’s body last weekend and is preparing his findings, according to the attorneys.
Deming was the son of an Oakdale reserve police officer and recently graduated from Piedmont Hills High School in San Jose, where he was a football player.
Scott Morris, Bay City News
By
Scott Morris, Bay City News
By
The more times you say something doesn’t make it more true. I still support Pleasanton PD and Officer Kunkel.
Still curious as to where Chief Spiller is in all this though.
I have no problem with how Mark Geragos earns his living as long as we all understand exactly what he’s doing and how he does it.
First, he is trying to put the PPD on the defensive by picking apart what he believes are the facts of the case. The PPD is wisely silent, waiting for the facts to come to light from the District Attorney’s office.
Second, he’s playing on the emotions of the public in grandstanding the search performed in John Deming’s home. It was an unfortunate situation but I think one correctly handled by the police.
Third, in none of the Geregos press releases does he address the only thing that matters, which is, was John Deming acting so irresponsibly that a police officer feared for his own life and took action?
Fourth, Geregos’ business model is to climb onto high-profile cases and then try them in the media. His clients have included:
Scott Peterson
Michael Jackson
Winona Rider
Greg Anderson (Barry Bonds’ trainer)
Of course the attorney is accusing the PPD of lying, that’s his job, it’s what he does. I’ll wait for this to all wash out in the various investigations. City Attorney please don’t pay out a settlement, we aren’t Oakland.
There is obviously a lot of questions to be answered here and we need to hold police accountable for their decision making, critical thinking skills and their mental state as well. Having worked closely with police departments I can tell you they have a lot of wrongful death litigations pending and the smart police departments are getting body cams for their officers to justify their behaviors.
1) Why did one news report say that the cop asked Deming to leave and he refused? Then tazed him in the back and it didn’t work so he shot him out of fear?
2) Couldn’t 2 officers wrestle an unarmed child (he is a minor) to the ground and cuff him?
3) What did they find at the scene? A weapon? Drugs? The fact they high tailed it over to the mother’s house with a search warrant “Ad Hoc” says the police were looking for something after the fact to pin Deming to.
4) Does Deming have priors? or was he just a sweet high school athlete that tried to go on a joy ride with high end cars? His prior record will tell a lot about him and if this was the first time stupid offense.
I think all Geragos is doing is getting down to the bottom of the story for closure. Yes, the police department ie City of Pleasanton will be held accountable for wrongful death if they caused his death and could have subdued the minor another way.
What I have found over the years, is some police not trained well and no ongoing training. They live in an authoritative world with them in control and many seek the help of county appointed psychologists. In fact, many times its required. I have seen both ends of the spectrum, from the most professional of officiers who are literate and actually went to college and understand their job as a Community Peace officer is to first try and difuse a situation especially if someone is unarmed.
I have also seen some police officers barely literate enough to understand directions and have questioned how some make it through training.
There is way too many questions on this tragedy, a young minor was killed. What is the real story.
@Something Fishy : “2) Couldn’t 2 officers wrestle an unarmed child (he is a minor) to the ground and cuff him? ….”
You used the word “minor” or “child” several times in your post when John Deming was neither. He was 19 years old. As for your criticism about officers having a difficult time wrestling with this “child”, I bet that you would have difficulty wrestling a “child” capable of throwing 50 lbs floor jacks through a window, too.
Yes, it is tragic that a young 19 year old adult lost his life in this way as the result of one bad mistake on one bad night. It’s too bad that the police don’t have more effective non-lethal tools for dealing with a situation like this than bean-bag guns and tasers. But I can’t fault that police for making sure that this youth didn’t get away and possibly harm someone.
Something Fishy, gonna start calling you Geregos # 2. Take a few random facts, change them to tell the story you want to tell, and then blast away.
Anybody that’s been following this case knows that John Deming wasn’t a minor, or a child as you say.
News reports are just that. Not surprising that there are discrepancies in the news reports. You can’t choose the reports you want to make examples of and ignore the rest. This is why PPD is waiting for the findings from the DA’s office.
Damn right they hightailed to the mom’s house, looking for evidence before it became lost or destroyed.
First time stupid offense or not, it was enough bad behavior to get him killed.
Geregos is not getting down to the bottom of the story for closure. He is getting down to the bottom of the story for money. The more controversy he can generate, the higher his fee will be next time.
Your own experiences with police don’t matter.
One can be “pro-law” and still be against use of deadly force when it isn’t necessary. There are too many discrepancies and changes to the stories in this case. Yes I support our police force but bad decisions are made too many times and the instinct of PD’s is to cover up for any mistakes.
Police training and mentality needs to change or more lives will be taken unnecessarily. I just couldn’t imagine that a burglary or even a scuffle warrants deadly force when the person is unarmed. What if it was a friend of family member of yours who did some dumb ass thing and ends up dead because of a bad decision by a cop. Cops are human and do make mistakes and when they do the PD force needs to own up. I’m not saying this guy didn’t deserve to be arrested but to take a life because he was getting away just isn’t cherishing human life.
But John Deming wasn’t shot because he was getting away. He was shot because he had attacked / was attacking a police officer who feared that if he didn’t use deadly force at that moment, that John Deming would continue to beat him and perhaps kill him or others.
This is so straight forward.
John Deming broke the law. He had multiple chances to follow the police officers orders. He didn’t. He attacked a police officer. He died due to his OWN actions.
I feel bad for the police officers involved.
There are consequences to taking drugs, breaking the law, and resisting arrest. End of story.
If a police officer says to do something- you do it. This is not a difficult concept.
If the police would have let him past their perimeter he may have injured someone, car jacked someone, murdered someone. The police were protecting us and for that we should thank you.
What’s most scary about all this is all the people saying, essentially,
<If the police kill you, you were guilty, simple as that. I support the police no matter what they do. I always believe the police. … >
We don’t know all the facts in this case. People have raised serious concerns. Can you at least wait until we get the results of the investigation? Maybe the police did everything by the book, maybe not.
But that’s not what people are saying. People are not saying that the police are always right. They are saying that John Deming is dead as a direct result of his own actions.
” They are saying that John Deming is dead as a direct result of his own actions.”
They may well be, but we don’t have all the facts yet.
Read what some people have written on other threads.
This criminal did one thing that guaranteed his death . He attacked and tried to kill a cop. No matter if he was in the business or not, on drugs or not, armed or not. Had the cops allowed him to escape simply because he was an unarmed man, a fact they had no way to know at the time of his attack, who knows where he would have ended up next. Perhaps he would have broken into my home and been killed there. Uninvited people in my home will be sentenced to death no matter their age, status as armed or not or even why they are in my home.
Enough commenting about how the cops woulda, coulda or shoulda taken him down non-violently. He started the fight, he lost. End of story.
Officer kunkel and John demming are both innocent until proven guilty. That’s a fact unless you do not believe in the constitution. This was an ingenious system that was designed to protect the accused and hopefully get to the truth.
If you wish to support the police that is your right. If you wish to support the suspect that is your right. A young man is dead and that’s a tragedy. In my opinion some people deserve death. Did mr demming? I don’t know and neither do any of you right now. I am 100 percent behind good officers. I am 100 percent against bad ones. Is kunkel a bad officer? I have no idea.
I am a tax paying American citizen I have the right to question my public servants. More than that society has an obligation to know all the facts. We have an obligation to either hold the officer accountable or defend him if this shooting was justified.
I am not wholeheartedly going to believe the suspects side or the officers side. The suspect does not work for me and they owe me no explanation although I would like to have one. The police do however work for me and the rest of society and they do owe us an explanation. If you have already made your decision of what happened that is your choice. I will continue to ask questions and gather info to try to determine what really happened that night. I will not be silenced by wanna be English teachers or those who seam to know exactly what happened that night when by their own admission they do not have all the facts. Want answers in life ask questions. It’s really a simple process. Two points. How many officers were present when the perimeter was set up and where were they stationed. More than eight the ppd have a problem. Less than five that might explain why only one officer kunkel witnessed the fight and the shooting. The audio recording is clear. From the time the K-9 unit entered the building to the time of the first shot is around 25 seconds. Can a suspect exit thru a broken window be chased by officer kunkel, be tasked in the back. Turn around and assault the officer. Be tased again as he is throwing punches then be shot. I do not know the answer to these questions but I think they should be asked along with many others if your goal is to get to the truth. Yea being a police officer is a tough job most of us deal with a holes on a daily basis the a holes the police deal with May kill them with every encounter. I get that and the good officers deserve our respect but at the end of the day they are still accountable to us. Oh yea and Damon you misspelled a word in your last attack on my grammar.
@Michael Austin,
It fits the definition:
homicide: a killing of one human being by another
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homicide
@Michael Austin : “The San Jose Mercury News has already declared this event a “homicide”.”
That’s pretty bad that a reporter for a major newspaper like the San Jose Mercury News does not know the definition of the word “homicide” AND that a mistake like that got by the newspaper’s editor. I hope that you emailed a note to both the reporter Joe Rodriguez and the editor because they should both be embarrassed by that mistake.
@BobB
Oxford defines “homicide” as “the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder”. ( http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/homicide ).
@Michael Austin,
I stand corrected. I may have jumped the gun on that, so to speak. I agree, we don’t know yet of it was the gunshot that killed him.
Fed Up, what interactions have you had with the Pleasanton Police? Funny how those of us that don’t break the law seem to have a positive opinion of the group.
@Damon,
I think you’re looking at a colloquial definition. In formal usage guidelines or legal guidelines, homicide only means the killing of a human being by another human being.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/homicide-murder-manslaughter-32637.html
@BobB
The definition of homicide that I presented was straight from the Oxford English Dictionary. Now I am aware of the fact that the law profession may have their own definition of the word “homicide”, but I would claim that the colloquial, commonly understood definition of “homicide” as the word is used by most Americans is closer to the Oxford definition than the definition that you presented, and therefore the newspaper’s use of the word “homicide” was a poor choice of words.
Here’s an example: Suppose that a robber breaks into a Pleasanton home and the homeowner confronts him and, after a struggle, wrestles the robber’s gun from him and kills the robber. Would you then say that the homeowner committed an act of homicide against the robber? I think that most people would say that that just doesn’t sound right, but according to the definition of the word “homicide” that you presented that would be proper usage.
Pleasanton police did everything wrong in responding to an unarmed, emotionally, or mentally disturbed person. They attacked an unarmed teenager and rapidly escalated the situation, which led to an unnecessary death. These are our trained professionals who should be trained better.
Looking at the information already available, most concerning the missing video, it is not responsible to blindly trust the police statement. On the audio multiple officers say he is talking to himself and behaving agitated. He was UNARMED. They should have used de-escalation skills not attacked and incited him.
Pleasanton police receive many hours of SWAT and tactical training but almost no CIT training.
I have spoke with dozens of Pleasanton families who have loved ones suffering through mental illness.
Who are PPD more likely to encounter in Pleasanton, an emotionally or mentally disturbed person, or a terrorist?
When police kill mentally ill:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/06/health/police-mental-health-training/
Crisis intervention teams were designed to change police response to mental illness.
“A big chunk of the training is verbal de-escalation skills,”
“CIT officers are trained to keep a safe distance, step back from a situation and let the person in crisis vent. “
“CIT takes a step back and get(s) the person to calm down. CIT officers are better prepared to work through that and come to some kind of solution.”
I agree that it is a common misunderstanding of the definition of the word. Kind of like using notorious and famous as synonyms.
Diana, that’s great, but you’re looking at the incident with the benefit of hindsight. Who knew he was unarmed? Crazy guy, 2AM, throwing equipment through the window, running around. What else does he have up his sleeve?
@Diana: “Pleasanton police did everything wrong in responding to an unarmed, emotionally, or mentally disturbed person.”
Not sure if being mentally ill changes anything, but I haven’t seen any report or comment from the parents that would suggest that the youth was mentally ill. And if the youth was mentally ill it seems that the parents would have certainly mentioned that in their interviews with the press. We’ll just have to wait and see what the toxicology report says.
Wotcher,
I have listened to the audio many times. They knew he was unarmed. They knew he was disturbed. There was more than enough indication to access the situation and not attack. They should have deescalated! I have less issue with officer Kunckle than with the department that handled the entire response wrong.
http://www.cableweb.org/resources/the-dutiful-mind-police-training-in-dealing-with-the-mentally-ill
“anywhere from 7 to 15% of the calls to which a police officer responds in this country involve someone with a mental illness”
“deliberate indifference”
“the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that inadequacy of police training may serve as a basis for municipal liability where failure to train amounts to deliberate indifference for the rights of persons with whom the police come into contact.”
Here we go again with the eyewitness thing. The inability of different people seeing the same thing to come up with the same description of what they saw. Only this time there is less information; an audio tape, some police statements, and some sparse newspaper reporting.
When it’s 2AM and somebody is agitated and running roughshod in a business, and is obviously capable of causing harm to either himself or to responders, I want a cop to respond, not a crisis counselor.
A person does not need to present a diagnosis of mental illness. Police should be professional enough to access the situation. Given his age his parents may have had no idea, a first break is usually a great shock to families. The audio confirms the officers on scene had enough information to access that they were dealing with a disturbed person. If CIT training had been used and John had not been attacked, he may not have panicked, trying to to get out, which led to the fatal confrontation with Kunkel.
I believe this teenager was experiencing a manic episode. But if his behavior was drug induced, de-escalation would have been the right course as well. He should not have died.
In listening to the audio: the canine cop says he is at the sight of the broken window seconds before the shooting. That was at that location of the shooting. How is it possible that he was not a witness and where is his video?
Our police have a responsibility to, and should be trained to, preserve life. John was a beloved son. If this had been handled properly he did not have to die.
If police are given authority to kill a person, for “uncertainty”, or being “capable” of causing harm at 2am… we are all in trouble.
OK, I think that we’ve pretty much exhausted this topic until the toxicology report or other new information comes in. Until then, two final points:
(1) Once John Deming revealed violent behavior – as he did by throwing a 50 lb floor jack through a plate glass window at the officers – the police had a duty to apprehend him. Letting him escape into the night and possibly harm an innocent civilian was not an option. In fact, it would have been a dereliction of duty for the police officers to have let him escape.
(2) John Deming did not die because he was jumping on top of cars, screaming, or throwing a 50 lb floor jack through window. He died in the act of violently attacking another person physically. The fact that that other person was a police officer is not even relevant since any person being violently attacked has the right of self-defense. That attack and that attack alone was the fateful act which led to John Deming’s death.
The tox report will not change that this was handled badly, which led to an unarmed teenagers death.
No one suggested that John should not have been apprehended, it should have been done in a way that John stayed alive. If John had not been attacked he may not have panicked. It is likely he would not have tried to get away. The prospect of an unarmed teenager, who just committed vandalism, eluding police, does not warrant a death sentence!
Until the video cam, that officer Kunkel was supposed to be wearing shows that he was attacked, there is no proof that justifies the killing an UNARMED teenager.
I support Pleasanton Police Department. But not when they are wrong. There is reason to be very concerned with this incident. There is an obligation to ask for accountability.
Another vote of support for the PPD. Thank you for your continued service.
It’s unfortunate this individual made multiple poor choices that led to him losing his life.
Diana, it was not handled badly. Somebody lost their life, but that in itself does not indicate mishandling by the police. It was a direct result of his own actions.
John Deming was not attacked. However, he did attack. It was his attack on the police officer that got him killed.
You can continue to label John Deming as an “unarmed teenager.” The fact is that he was an adult capable of adult acts, which included beating on a police officer.
Diana,
Thank you for standing up for those with mental illness. I know first hand how horribly this police department can treat people whose only “crime” is to have a mental health disease. I am praying Geragos will be able to expose this as he gathers information on this case. The abuse I was subjected to is/was extremely traumatizing and included outright lies which I had the presence of mind to record. I managed to get an apology, but only because I could prove the abusive conduct and because they knew I wouldn’t go public given the nature of the illness.
Given the recording I have possession of, perhaps I should reach out to Mr. Geragos myself since I’m sure the police department thought this was funny and likely exchanged several high five’s at my expense. I imagine a case could be made that my civil rights were violated. To this day, I live with the fear of retaliation. I’m certainly not a criminal nor have I ever been accused of being destruction, a danger to myself or anyone else. They were so out of line that it really upsets me just to re live what they did to me that evening.
Very sad.
Thank You, sorry to hear of your troubles, but they have zero bearing on John Deming’s death.
See if Geregos will take your case on its own merits, given that you have evidence.
Daina…the fact you are basing your entire diatribe on your personal feelings aside….the fact someone is mentally ill does not excuse their actions. CIT training is great for someone who is in crisis and not yet broke from reality. This is obviously not the case here. Perhaps you could offer your services to the PD the next time they are put in a situation with a jack throwing, command ignoring, public safety threatening idiot. You could run up and give him a big hug and then sit down and talk about your white guilt.
Your lack of understanding concerning police tactics is also very apparent. Maybe you could take some time off from the free clinic in Berkeley and go on a ride along…until then please limit your comments to things you understand…like cats, sancutuary cities and braiding armpit hair.
@watcher:
Thank you for your kind words. My decision to come forward and maybe sue has a huge price tag to it in that I’d have to determine the value of my privacy. And my privacy is everything. If it does turn out that there was police misconduct here, I will likely reach out to Mr. Geragos since I can shed some light on how PPD handles mental health calls. In my case, even though I was not a danger to myself or anyone else, the officers tried to 5150 me for no other reason than I was trying to get the watch commander out there because it was so out of control and they were being so abusive (and enjoying every bit of it). They were trying to 5150 even though they knew I was in no danger and even though the Fire Capt on scene (sp?) said I should not be put on a hold. Once I started asking for names of who was there, they got worse and didn’t know I was recording all of it. At the end, the fire department and paramedics refused to take away my freedom despite what the officers insisted should happen. The damage had been done (and recorded) by the police. I get an upset stomach every time I re-live it.
I do think it’s important to note that this police department is far from perfect. I bet the incident report on the welfare call I experienced and the recorded says something different than what I later proved. I have every reason to believe this could and probably did happen in this case too. Why tell the truth when I’m pretty sure the dead individual could not record it.
To give this department complete benefit of doubt is a mistake as I can personally prove they don’t always follow proper protocol and processes nor do they always tell the truth. Learning this the hard way will stick with me for the rest of my life. I still fear driving around town because they all know who I am and would love to repay me for recording them behaving badly.
This could all be put to rest very easily if they’d just release the audio recorders all officers have with them at all times. They might be able to successfully claim there was no video, but I promise you there is audio. If there’s not, this means that it’s being hidden because they all have one and that Geragos better subpoena the recordings before they are destroyed.
Oh, and I live in Pleasanton, have for 30 years. I have kids in Pleasanton schools, and a huge school volunteer and contribute in other ways to the community. Having a mental health condition does not stop m, although knowing the police department has me on their radar as a “crazy” does cause me to avoid them at all costs.
Why don’t all of us wait and see what comes out during this investigation. The only side we see, and that some are accepting as 100% factual, is that of law enforcement. I have recordings of two officers blatantly lying to me. Do you think the report of that evening (that I recorded) wasn’t altered once I let them listen to my recordings. With this guy deceased, the only story to be told is PPD and we already know they can and do lie and not treat individuals in crisis properly. If it’s a training issue, then fine, let’s get that in place ASAP. The next life it may save could be my own.
Do you really think they wouldn’t lie again to cover their own asses when they knew no one else could have recorded it. The audio and video is readily available and should have been released by now. Releasing it would resolve many issues and answer many questions.
Thank You,
Let me get this straight. You go onto this thread and expound how the PPD should have handled the John Deming situation differently, that he’s dead because of no fault of his own, that the PPD shot first and asked questions later, etc., etc.
Now you say that you yourself were causing a disturbance at some point, enough so that the cops on scene wanted to put you into a “5150.” A 5150, I now know since I looked it up, is an “involuntary psychiatric hold.” The Urban Dictionary defines “5150” as police jargon for “a crazy one on the loose.”
So to net this out, in your case the PPD did actually act like a CIT (Crisis Intervention Team) instead of slapping you in irons and hauling you away.
Am I following correctly?
Wotcher:
Sorry for the confusion. Let me try to better explain.
My home and office are both in Pleasanton. I was at my office until the early hours of the next morning just catching up on contracts and my database. I called an advice nurse from the office phone because I had a question about a medication I was taking and admitted that I had been pretty depressed. She tried to call me back about half hour later, but you can’t get through the auto answer and she would have had to have known my extension. I didn’t know anyone was try to reach me.
As I sat in my office working away, four or five cops show up and half circle me while standing over me. The fire department and paramedics showed up shortly thereafter. It was called in to them as a mental health welfare check and instead they treated me like I was committing a crime, which I had not. I was literally sitting in from of my computer typing. It was during this discussion that I flipped on my iPhone recorder fully aware that I was going to be put on a 5150 hold in retaliations for me questioning the cops that night. You must be a danger to yourself or another, neither of which I was. The fire department and captain was also present and refused to force me on the gurney because I did not meet the definition of a person needing to be 5150. So PPD was willing to order me held against my will even when the fire captain and paramedics could see it was ridiculous. Thank goodness the fire dept and paramedics were there. If PPD had been there alone, I would have been taken against my will when I did not meet the criteria for this kind of treatment.
Since the call for me was a mental health welfare check, They new in advance what the potential issues was. If the PPD had been given any training on working with someone struggling with mental health symptoms, this situation I dealt with would have been very different. I also wonder if the issue with the deceased man would have been handled differently and that his life might have been preserved.
@watcher:
See, you’ve already come to the conclusion that I was creating some “disturbance” that the police had to handle. “so much so, that they had to consider a “5150”. Can you please try to see that your assumptions are completely false.
– I was not creating a disturbance. It was a welfare check after I had spoken to a nurse and admitted I was depressed. When the nurse tried to call me back, she was unable to reach me so called PPD. When the PPD got there, there had been some history because they treated my like hell once before over a child custody issue with my ex husband. My “disturbance” consisted of me sitting alone in an empty office (with security) in front of my computer typing with a little low level music playing in the background. No erratic behavior ever. Never damaged anything. Never broke a law. I simply took on the PPD and filed a complaint that Lt. Knox promptly found unfounded and dismissed it. Since I knew how they could be, it resulted in my turning on my recorder during the incident in my office because I knew no one would believe me if I couldn’t prove it. They would make the same wrong assumptions you did in that I did something to bring this on myself.
It’s very hard to always be in the position of defending myself because so many people are like you and think the police can do no wrong. You even assumed I was created a disturbance which could not have been any further from the truth.
They did issue me an apology after admitting they behaved inappropriately and only after hearing the recordings. I assure you that without the recordings, filing a complaint would have been useless since one of their own investigates and the officers certainly didn’t put the truth in the incident report filed.
If you think they can’t or don’t lie, you are wrong. If you think they know how to handle someone experiencing a possible mental health crisis, you are wrong.
You can tell so much about a city by how they treat their most vulnerable. Pleasanton Police has made is very clear they don’t want me in town and I fear retaliation every time I leave my house. They don’t have to worry about this young man coming back.
Wotcher , I do not have a negative view of all the Pleasanton officers , I happen to find the motorcycle officers friendly and approachable , they used to set up to catch speeders by my house and I’d walk down with my daughter and they always took a moment to smile or wave and even say hello . My negative view of the majority of the force comes not just from my experiences with them ,but from other accounts I’ve heard .How come nothing is mentioned about the dispatcher who was arrested for possession of Meth or the officer that was being sued ?
Listen to the dispatch recording . If you don’t have reservation after doing so , you’re in denile . I wasn’t there and can’t begin to imagine what it was like for that officer ,I’m sure it will affect him for the rest of his life . He didn’t wake up and say Today I’m going to kill someone . I’m simply suggesting that an in-depth look should be taken into weather or not there have been complaints filed against the department in the past for misconduct .
I’ve personally seen plenty of lies and harassment by the PPD over the decades. Those that wish to turn a blind eye to their tactics are either misguided sycophants or simply idiotic sheep. News flash, police do lie on nearly every report and it’s always going to paint them as innocent of any wrongdoing. They will alter the facts and omit key details, perform illegal searches etc. All the blind faith cheerleaders for the cops weren’t there and none of you know if the young man attacked anyone first if at all. You don’t even know who threw a jack or why.
Even if a suspect breaks a cops nose, fights him or runs it still doesn’t equate to a death sentence. Just because a suspect is unruly or embarrasses an officer it shouldn’t excuse cowardly gunplay. Do you really think the killers life was in immediate peril with all the cops on the scene? Very doubtful. When a suspect runs after supposedly breaking into a unoccupied business do you just shoot him to save your fragile ego? Isn’t this when the batons or service dogs should come out? With so many police and several options available it is unacceptable to kill a suspect so quickly if at all. These are situations that they are supposed to be trained for but do you think they showed any compassion? Ill-trained and in the wrong line of work is more likely.
Part of serving with humility is that you will have to tolerate more than a regular citizen would be expected to. They aren’t trained to react in anger when attacked or confronted. If it was your child that was sick due to drugs or illness would you want him shot within seconds regardless of what may have happened? How many of you have had a night that you wish you could take back?
I continue to support the Pleasanton Police Department.
The San Jose Mercury News has already declared this event a “homicide”.
Reporter Joe Rodriguez reporting for the Mercury News, had this to say.
“Deming was the first person killed by a Pleasanton police officer in over a decade, and the city’s first homicide since 2012”.
@BobB:
I expect that you will be in denial long after a coroner’s inquest rules this death to be a justifiable homicide.
The reporter for the Mercury News Joe Rodriquez assumed this burglar died as the result of a gun shoot. This in light of the fact, the Alameda County Coroner has not stated the cause of death.
@Damon:
FYI, I did email jrodrigues@mercurynews.com and editor McMullen, rmcmullen@bayareanewsgroup.com.
I asked for a retraction and or correction.
Accidentally typed the “@” symbol above.