September 03, 2006

Hidden: Off-duty police officer shoots Chargers LB Foley: "My understanding is he was shot three times in front of his house by an off-duty officer and that he's in surgery," Foley's agent, David Levine, told The Associated Press.

posted by wingnut4life to football at 06:10 PM - 103 comments

Three times? Was that necessary? I understand that Foley needs to get his head out of his arse when it comes to drinking, but three times? It makes me wonder if there was a weapon involved that we're not hearing about yet.

posted by wingnut4life at 06:13 PM on September 03, 2006

Here in L.A. people would be shocked the cop only fired 3 rounds. With so few details on why he was shot the cop may have been showing real restraint.

posted by commander cody at 07:01 PM on September 03, 2006

Three times? If I was Foley,one would have more than enough.Stupid is as stupid does. And then Shottenheimer says he is only worried that Foley is Ok.I would be worried about how many idiots are on the Chargers.

posted by sickleguy at 07:47 PM on September 03, 2006

Wild story. Look forward to getting more details.

posted by T$PORT4lawschool at 11:31 PM on September 03, 2006

Oddly enough, he reportedly got into a scuffle with police about a week before this incident. It makes me wonder if there was a weapon involved that we're not hearing about yet. There damn well better have been a weapon involved, why the hell else is an off duty cop shooting someone. If you can notice someone drunk driving, you would have to assume that they were all over the road. Usually when someone is all over the road, they end up failing simple sobriety tests, for example, like standing up straight. How much of a threat is someone who has their hand "near" their waistline without actualy brandishing a weapon (gun, knife, bat, crowbar, WALLET). I don't care how big they are, drunk, pepper spray, night-stick usually= under control. If the woman steered the car at the cop, why is it Foley was the one hit? The officer identified himself, authorities said, and warned Foley he was armed. He fired a warning shot, at which point Gaut steered the car at the officer, sheriff's officials said Why the hell are you firing warning shots because someone is walking toward you? If there was a weapon I think they would already be talking about it, because this doesn't look good at all. Look forward to getting more details I'm sure you can't wait to hear how much he deserved being shot. if he was running from the police and threatning them they should have unloaded there clips in his sorry ass. Make an example out of him Im sick of these football players thinking there above the law Did you read the article? The cop was OFF DUTY, i.e. no flashing lights, sirens, etc. If he had lights and sirens he wouldn't have had to IDENTIFY himself as a police officer and tell the guy he was ARMED , a 5 year old can recognize a cop car and knows cops are armed. Notice: It's not ok to "empty clips into peoples sorry ass's" because ptluigi is tired of football players. Some people's kid's.....why I oughtta....

posted by Bishop at 12:31 AM on September 04, 2006

Bishop, let me get this straight. An off duty cop tries to stop an obviously impaired driver and it takes not one or two, but three attempts to get the guy stopped. During the first two attempts, there was verbal interaction, so they knew they were busted and still kept trying to flee. When the driver is out of the car, he's still not cooperative and is threatening enough that the cop feels the need to fire a warning shot. The female passenger then gets behind the wheel and tries to run the cop down, and when the cop has the audacity to fire on the vehicle, the original driver starts at him. The cop's already fired a warning shot, and this idiot is ready to charge in, but the cop has no right to feel threatened? You're kidding, right? Cops are injured and killed every year because they hesitate too long to resort to force, and this cop was off duty, so I doubt if he had all his usual equipment available (like a taser of pepper spray). The chain of events led to a point where the cop had two choices. He could either retreat and let them go, or he could do what it took to stop the large, angry man approaching him from being a threat. Even if letting them go because they'd threatened him with physical harm wouldn't have been an abrogation of his duty, it would have been immoral (assuming that they got in the car and left, it would almost certainly have been at an even more frenzied pace than the one that led to catching the cop's attention, and nearly causing several crashes, in the first place). Since that wasn't an accepatable outcome, the cop took option B, and he was right. Foley is damned lucky he's not dead.

posted by ctal1999 at 02:02 AM on September 04, 2006

Even if letting them go because they'd threatened him with physical harm wouldn't have been an abrogation of his duty, it would have been immoral (assuming that they got in the car and left, it would almost certainly have been at an even more frenzied pace than the one that led to catching the cop's attention, and nearly causing several crashes, in the first place). Good logic except that there were more than two choices (arrest him yourself or go on doing whatever you were doing), and had the cop taken a third one, things might have ended better. I have to think it's not the smartest thing in the world for an off-duty, out-of-uniform, not-driving-a-cruiser cop to try to pull over someone that he believes to be a drunk driver. You're talking about someone you believe to be impaired, that is, someone whose judgment has gone out the window. If they're really blotto, how well are they going to process your "identification"? Drunk. May respond to flashing blue lights and uniforms. May think a guy in civvies is just trying to start with him. Call it in and let the uniforms handle it.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:55 AM on September 04, 2006

I have to think it's not the smartest thing in the world for an off-duty, out-of-uniform, not-driving-a-cruiser cop to try to pull over someone that he believes to be a drunk driver. That's the problem I have with it. How was Foley to know this guy was really a cop? The guy follows him, without a uniform or police car, etc. into an upscale neighborhood and expects to be treated as a law officer? Everything Foley did was wrong, but this off-duty cop needs to dial it down a notch. Call for some on-duty police to handle the situation.

posted by dyams at 08:08 AM on September 04, 2006

something about this story really stinks.since when do off-duty officers do drunk-driving stops?if he suspected foley was impaired he should have called a patrol unit.if he tries to stop a robbery in progress,or something like that,I could see this officer getting involved .but him pullling someone over is out of bounds.mr. foley is not blameless by any stretch. but if this "officer" would have played this by the book, wich I presume he didn't,maybe things would have turned out better.some one needs to tell "die-hard" supercop that he is more to blame in this situation than anybody else.there is a reason you get time off,use it.how many people do you know pull over for someone in a regular car?I smell lawsuit.

posted by mars1 at 09:17 AM on September 04, 2006

they say the sheriffs declined to give any information about the officer.anybody want to bet the guy is not white?

posted by mars1 at 09:23 AM on September 04, 2006

I have to agree with mars 1, when is an off-duty cop able to pull someone over that's drunk? If an officer is off-duty, that's excactly what it means, OFF-DUTY! I can understand if the officer saw a B & E or something of that sort, but that's like saying an off-duty cop sees someone speeding and decides to chase after them. Regardless if he's a cop or not, a civilian will not know any different and think that the cop is a regular guy that's trying to be a hero of some sort. I agree that Chargers LB Steve Foley was in the wrong for driving intoxicated but does that justify him getting plugged 3 times by an off-duty cop? The officer should have known better and called it in. That way, officers in uniform would have handled the situation accordingly and taken cared of the situation without incident. If a patrol car with flashing lights and a uniformed officer is availiable, only an idiot would react with violence towards an officer. The officer over-reacted and will probably be suspended WITH pay and no charges will be brought to Foley. Heed my words!!

posted by BornIcon at 09:38 AM on September 04, 2006

Im a huge bengals fan, but whats up with all the current players, and old players getting in trouble with the law.......Must be something in the water around here.....Who Dey.......

posted by s_faehr at 09:42 AM on September 04, 2006

I just saw an update on this, and according to police, the officer shot Foley once in the chest after Foley advanced on him and reached at his waistband for something. Foley said that he was hit, but continued to advance on the officer, who then shot him two more times before he went down. May respond to flashing blue lights and uniforms. May think a guy in civvies is just trying to start with him. Call it in and let the uniforms handle it. Why is it people immediately want to take the side of the criminal in these cases? Imagine the reverse in the case -- the off-duty cop calls it in, awaits back-up and then Foley kills a couple people running a light. Are you cool with it then? Off-duty or not, I trust his judgement more than I do yours as to whether the situation warrants immediate action. The officer has every right, and I think a responsibility, to make the stop. If the guy's too drunk to understand, "Hey, I'm a cop, I have a gun and you're under arrest," that's his own damned fault. My Google Fu sucks, but here's at least one page with the understanding that an off-duty cop is still a cop.

posted by wfrazerjr at 09:45 AM on September 04, 2006

Answer this... "Why would an off duty cop from Coronado follow a suspected drunk driver to poway and then try to stop him? That's more than enough time to get an on duty cop to handle it.

posted by mrrocnron at 10:30 AM on September 04, 2006

Thanks wfrazerjr! I was about to reply to several of the comments posted since my last one, and you did most of it for me. Dead on. Remember, there were three stops here. Foley just drove away from the first two, but we know that there was verbal communication, and I'd be amazed if the cop didn't show his badge. If they thought it was a fake, the best bet would have been for THEM to dial 9-1-1 about someone impersonating an officer (which would, of course, mean that the "real" cops would probably see how drunk Foley was, but that's better than being killed by some psycho who claims to be a cop, right?). Also remember, Foley was arrested in the spring for public intoxication and battery on a police officer. If the cop recognized the local NFLer, he had to realize that there was a very real possibility that he'd get messed up by this guy if he allowed it. The cop's in a no-win situation here. It sounds like Foley was impaired to the point that it was extremely obvious, and very dangerous to everyone else on the road. If the cop called it in and hung back to watch, he'd have been criticized if Foley ended up killing someone. Now he's being criticized for not hanging back, and for using too much force on a guy who apparently kept coming after he was hit the first time. The article doesn't say, but I'd bet that the cop called it in (which is why a marked car was at the site of the shooting "within seconds"), and then tried to control the situation as soon as possible rather than wait, since every minute that Foley continued to careen down the road made it more likely that somebody else would end up dead. Foley was stupid on too many levels to list, and many of you are criticizing a cop who decided that it was unacceptable to allow a drunken idiot to continue to endanger the public any longer than absolutely needed. Un-friggin'-real!

posted by ctal1999 at 10:51 AM on September 04, 2006

The article does not say that the officer called for backup- I have plenty of friends that are police officers and most agree that the off-duty officer should've called for backup. If he didn't, then he's at fault. I am in way, shape or form "taking the side of a criminal" as wfrazerjr is suggesting, I am just saying that he did not deserved to be shop 3 times if he was unarmed. No one does

posted by BornIcon at 11:32 AM on September 04, 2006

Why is it people immediately want to take the side of the criminal in these cases? Someone getting shot by a cop doesn't make that person a criminal, so that is part of it. Further, many people have had experiences with cops that left them more than suspicious of whether police are always on the up and up. An off-duty police officer shooting an unarmed suspect who might be drinking and driving coupled with Foley's previous incident with the cops where he was accused of battery and resisting arrest and all of the charges were dropped makes me doubly suspicous of this incident.

posted by bperk at 11:35 AM on September 04, 2006

he did not deserve to be shop 3 times if he was unarmed. No one does. I tell the little lady that everytime she gets a notion to ask me to go to the mall with her. Couldn't agree more.

posted by mjkredliner at 11:40 AM on September 04, 2006

I wrote (wrt drunk drivers): May respond to flashing blue lights and uniforms. May think a guy in civvies is just trying to start with him. Call it in and let the uniforms handle it. and wfrazerjr responded: Why is it people immediately want to take the side of the criminal in these cases? wfrazerjr, what does the word "may" mean in your dictionary? Since when does it have anything to do with taking sides? Since when is it "tak[ing] the side of the criminal" to point out that the cop's actions might not have been the best way to proceed in this case? And did I really have to spell it out that this way of "dealing" with a drunk driver could have led to problems not only for the suspect, but for the cop himself? The officer has every right, and I think a responsibility, to make the stop. I think he's got a responsibility to do something. As I pointed out, that doesn't mean making the stop himself. I'm not a cop (are you?). For all I know, it's SOP for off-duty cops to jump in and make an arrest whenever they see a lawbreaker, any kind of lawbreaker, in any kind of circumstances. Maybe it is, but somehow I doubt it. It just doesn't make any sense. My Google Fu sucks, but here's at least one page with the understanding that an off-duty cop is still a cop. Strawman. Get the broom.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:43 AM on September 04, 2006

Why is it people immediately want to take the side of the criminal in these cases? I thought he was a football player. I have not seen any reports as to his BAC, just the word of an off duty cop. Imagien the reverse in the case-the off-duty cop calls it in, awaits back-up and Foley kills a couple of people running a light. Are you cool with it then? Yes I am. It would not be on the cop, but on Foley for killing said people, he was the one driving. How do we know that Foley's driving was not a direct result of this guy chasing him. Anyone can say they are a cop. I have a badge that says I am the Sheriff of Dodge City. Foley was stupid on too mant levels to list, and many of you are criticizing a cop who decided that it was unacceptable to allow a drunken idiot to continue to endanger the public any longer than absolutely needed. Un-friggin-real! What happened to presumed innocent? you are thaking the word of the cop as proof. As for calling Foley and idiot, this asshole fired his gun eight times, he is just as dangerous if not more. How does he know where his warning shot went.

posted by CB900 at 11:52 AM on September 04, 2006

this is Labor Weekend, the off duty was probably hoping a squad car would respond, but maybe they were all looking for cigarette smokers down at the beach. SDPD is over worked and under staffed, because of the Cities financial problems. The off duty stuck with him, which he should have, in case there was an accident. Part of Foley's punishment should be to watch a full season of Cops, to learn how to behave during the pinch.

posted by Two Buck Chuck at 12:22 PM on September 04, 2006

JUST WIN BABY"Don't you realize that Foley is a star football player. Certain priviliges go with that, like the DA dropping charges on a similar action earlier this year. The Judges and DA's would have done the same for you, HA! This is not only in San Diego but any Pro Player can get a pass on almost anything, even murder, if you are a standout player. "JUST WIN BABY"

posted by zormax at 12:36 PM on September 04, 2006

ctal1999, I will respond to you since you addressed my thoughts first. I have no problem with the other view point here. The only thing I would ask you is, if there was no shooting at all, and Foley went to court for this, would you vote as a member of the jury to give him the chair for this incident? And I want you to answer the question honestly. Do you think Foley should get the death penalty for what he did? Because that's the choice the cop made when he decided to open fire. Please note the unbiased witnesse's account of what they heard and saw: Another neighbor, Rick Jennings, said he was awake at 3:40 a.m. when he heard yelling outside. He went outside after hearing two loud pops he thought were firecrackers. "I heard a female scream, 'Let it go! No, no, no!' And then four more shots. I heard more screaming and then two more shots and in seconds the first marked officer showed up." That's 8 shots total. First of all, I would agree that he did call for back up being that a witness says a marked unit arrived in seconds after the shooting. Then you have to wonder did this hot head want to get his gun off before a normal policeman got there to witness the situation. According to the witness there were 6-8 shots, he was hardly trying to wound this guy hitting him 3 times. And last but certainly not least allow me to ask you if you are fucking serious? Are you? Who the hell is going to verify this guy was "reaching for his waistband/waistline" or what have you. WHERE IS THE WEAPON? I would agree a lot more with this cops actions if they could produce a weapon. You may say, the female used the car as a weapon, well that was after this guy started popping off shots for no apparent reason. Please note that it was stated that she was driving the car towards the cop kind of following Foley, telling him "no no, let it go". These 2 were provoked by gunfire. Imagine how threatened you would feel if someone starting shooting at you for driving crazy. And don't give me no bullshit about "what if he hit someone". That Rodney King BS doesn't work. or he could do what it took to stop the large, angry man approaching him from being a threat You have got to be kidding me? Kill the guy because you don't think you could whip his ass? Are you really serious? "Large"?? Now it's ok to shoot someone that has no weapon, based soley on his size, and he may put an ass whipping on you? The cop didn't have his normal gear? (pepper spray, taser etc?) "Oh well, can't find my pepper spray, it's lights out for this asshole". Listen to what you are saying, "I must shoot this guy because I don't have the option to spray him". Your argument is pointless. It's on the same level as the guy who's posts were removed, "the cop should have emptied his clip into this guy because I'm tired of football players". "He nearly hit several cars while weaving in and out of traffic". Sure he did, none of these people had a cell phone? No reports of an out of control driver on the highway being chased by another car (that they couldn't know was a cop because he was off duty)? Show me some 911 calls from the people that nearly lost their lives because of Foley's driving. Show me something other than a cop saying "he reached for his waistband". I'm a big guy, the first damn thing I have to do is pull my pants up when I get out of the car. Then again, I heard a little story about a guy catching 41 shots for reaching for his wallet, but hey, how could those cops have known it wasn't a leather gun?

posted by Bishop at 12:46 PM on September 04, 2006

I can't believe the number of people that side with Foley and automatically assume the POLICEMAN was in the wrong. It's really amazing. A man, who was already involved in a resisting arrest situation previously. This same man refuses to stop 3 times after being asked to. This same man has his passenger get behind the wheel and then try to run over the policeman. This man is 6-4 240 lbs and continued approaching the policeman when the policeman had his gun drawn. All the evidence we have right now seems the cop ABSOLUTELY is justified in shooting him 3 times. It may turn out to be a bad cop using bad procedures, but right now there is no evidence to indicate otherwise, so it's odd how everyone assumes the COP is the bad one here, rather than the guy who actually has a precedent for this???? As for why the off-duty cop is pulling him over..he is required to under his job description if he feels the situation is putting innocent people at risk. That is why he is supposed to carry his gun even when he goes to the grocery store. It's not only not ODD that he would do this, it is his RESPONSIBILITY and what we pay him for. Now he should have called for backup first, but there is no evidence that he did not.

posted by bdaddy at 01:06 PM on September 04, 2006

You have got to be kidding me? Kill the guy because you don't think you could whip his ass? Are you really serious? "Large"?? Now it's ok to shoot someone that has no weapon, based soley on his size, and he may put an ass whipping on you? The cop didn't have his normal gear? (pepper spray, taser etc?) "Oh well, can't find my pepper spray, it's lights out for this asshole" First off, he's off duty...so no pepper spray. (he does have to carry his gun though). Secondly, who's to say he's just going to get his ass kicked? There are cops killed all the time by people who fight them and wrestle their gun away from them and kill them. A guy, especially a 6-4, 240 lb guy, does not have to be a weapon to be considered immediately dangerous and to think so is simply idiotic.

posted by bdaddy at 01:14 PM on September 04, 2006

Too much speculation for much of this. My intial reaction is simply - Is it necessary for cops to shoot an unarmed man three times? When, exactly is this okay and necessary?

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:32 PM on September 04, 2006

Is it necessary for cops to shoot an unarmed man three times? When, exactly is this okay and necessary? Just do a search on this type of subject and you'll see tons of videos where a cop gets attacked by an unarmed person and has to fight for their life. There's one where the cop gets his gun taken away and is shot with it, but I won't link to that one. Here's an example, where the cop almost died from the injuries. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojvHyQCHhVc

posted by bdaddy at 01:43 PM on September 04, 2006

All the evidence we have right now seems the cop ABSOLUTELY is justified in shooting him 3 times. Says you. All the evidence I see so far makes me wonder why the cop didn't wait until his backup arrived to confront the guy.

posted by bperk at 01:52 PM on September 04, 2006

Says you. All the evidence I see so far makes me wonder why the cop didn't wait until his backup arrived to confront the guy. what evidence have you seen regarding WHY he pulled him over? Or why he didn't have backup? I haven't seen anything reported that would question why he pulled him over other than a bunch of people on this forum who think that he should have waited.

posted by bdaddy at 01:58 PM on September 04, 2006

The only evidence is that the guy was driving erratically. So, follow him, wait for your backup to arrive, then confront the guy. That is the safest thing to do for all involved.

posted by bperk at 02:04 PM on September 04, 2006

Everyone defending Foley should try to make ONE traffic stop that time of night, with a large suspect who has a history of drunk and beligerent behaviour, and I bet a bunch of you will be reaching for your sidearm. And yeah, if he's drivin erratically, he damn sure needs to be pulled over. Thats not as easy of a job as some of you folks think it is. As bdaddy says, the danger is very real, and I doubt any of you would take a chance with your own hide. Some damn good cops have wound up dead over what looked like much more benign situations. Wise up, Foley, ya friggin jerk.

posted by mjkredliner at 02:39 PM on September 04, 2006

You know what? Fuck it. There is so much stupidity and posing in this thread it's not worth trying to argue it. I'll take Weedy's advice and be back when I can find a police report and more of the facts are available -- which, from now on, is what I'll do in all of these threads. Oh, and Weedy, email me (in profile) -- I have Jays tickets for tomorrow night.

posted by wfrazerjr at 02:55 PM on September 04, 2006

posted by yerfatma at 03:03 PM on September 04, 2006

From the article- The shooting occurred after Foley got out of the vehicle near his home and began walking toward the officer, sheriff's officials said. Gaut got behind the wheel and drove next to Foley in the direction of the officer, the officials said. The officer identified himself, authorities said, and warned Foley he was armed. He fired a warning shot, at which point Gaut steered the car at the officer, sheriff's officials said. Like bdaddy said, this is a 6'4'' 240 lbs guy who has previously been charged with resisting arrest and battery of a police officer, and is now coming toward the cop. At the same time Gaut is steering the car in the direction of the officer. In this situation the cop is confronted by a huge drunk guy, and isn't sure what he is going to do. I'm obviously not a mind reader, but I would bet that the cop was at least a little bit scared with that guy coming towards him. Everyone makes a big deal about how he hit him three times, he was off duty, and it was to excessive if it was neccesary at all. The guy fired a warning shot and they didn't stop. They kept coming at him so he felt it was neccesary to stop them before they could attack him.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 03:05 PM on September 04, 2006

mjk: Everyone defending Foley should try to make ONE traffic stop that time of night At least some of us are wondering whether making that stop was the smart move for an off-duity, out-of-uniform cop, mjk. wfrazerjr: You know what? Fuck it. There is so much stupidity and posing in this thread it's not worth trying to argue it. It's "stupidity and posing" when I call you for quoting me and then saying, "Why is it people immediately want to take the side of the criminal in these cases?" It's "stupidity and posing" to respond when my words are misrepresented? I agree with you on one thing: more facts are needed. Whether all the facts are to be found in a police report is another question, but it's a place to start.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:07 PM on September 04, 2006

l_b_b is right. We don't have all the facts. Some of us are looking at what's available, and interpreting that limited information in favor of the cop. Others seem to be thinking of some of the ugly, high profile incidents that have come to light where the cops were sometimes less than admirable at best and downright criminal at worst. They express doubts about the cop, his motives, and his general handling of the situation. I get it, even though I don't agree. I still think that the vast majority of cops are just guys and gals trying to do a very difficult and dangerous job. Overall, I'm pretty confident that I'm right, but in the case of this particular cop...? Maybe more information will come to light that clears things up, but for now we're all just engaging in rampant speculation, fueled by emotion (and I've been as guilty as any).

posted by ctal1999 at 03:39 PM on September 04, 2006

From the article: "second run-in with police in 4 1/2 months." "the early morning shooting occurred after the off-duty police officer followed a suspect drunken driver weaving in and out of traffic at speeds up to 90 mph." Authorities said the driver nearly collided with several other vehicles. Pretty simple math tells you that somethin' don't add up right. It was early Saturday morning, Labor Day Weekend, a time for which many Law Enforcement Divisions are known to have an excessive amount of problems on their hands, and the officer may have saved Foley's life, much less some innocent bystander who may have been caught up in his recklessness and/or drunkeness. A crime was being committed, plainly. If you would rather off-duty Law Enforcement not get involved, or have them wait until "back-up" can arrive, then you have no right to complain if ever you are victimized in a similar circumstance. I'm pretty damn sure the San Diego Sheriffs Department, and the officer involved, have better things to do than to fabricate evidence about Foley. I reckon he got what he deserved.

posted by mjkredliner at 04:37 PM on September 04, 2006

Hey, I don't doubt the crime, I doubt the response. I'm inclined to - I like to give the benefit of the doubt. I may be right off my rocker, but I generally don't put DUIs into the realm of shoot to kill. Of course, I don't really know the first thing about what really went on, like you. Suffice to say that I have had a few buddies who have had run ins with the OPP (Ontario Provincial Police) and they were beaten down with pounds of back bacon in wholely unwarranted overreactions to their crimes. (Back bacon doesn't leave marks. Tricky cops... Does smell pretty good though. "Dude, you got hammerd on by sweet porky justice.")

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 04:48 PM on September 04, 2006

I may be right off my rocker, but I generally don't put DUIs into the realm of shoot to kill. I don't know about you but I don't think the officer was shooting to kill. I think he was shooting to stop his advance, not to kill him.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 05:23 PM on September 04, 2006

I'm sorry but all I can say is what THE FUCK, now I'll tell you why. Take a long look at why some of you are saying it was the right thing to do. I'll list some. 1. Like bdaddy said, this is a 6'4'' 240 lbs guy who has previously been charged with resisting arrest Since when is being big and punching a cop punishable by DEATH? 2.the early morning shooting occurred after the off-duty police officer followed a suspect drunken driver weaving in and out of traffic at speeds up to 90 mph." Authorities said the driver nearly collided with several other vehicles Holy shit, he ALMOST caused a car accident. Frag his ass. Last but not least my favorite: 3.but I would bet that the cop was at least a little bit scared with that guy coming towards him. Come on people, this is America. Since when is it ok to shoot someone because your scared? If you're scared of a big guy, get in your car, or get a new line of work. The FUCKING GUY WAS HOME, where the hell is he going? Back up got there seconds after the shots were fired. The cop knew he had help coming. I'm not making excuses for some ass who was driving like he owned the road, but some of you people have to get that, "it's ok for cops to shoot at whoever they damn well please" shit out of your head. These actions are not punishable by death Being big punching a cop driving crazy One of these days, and i hope it never happens, 1 or 2 of you are going to have your American rights taken from you by someone in law enforcement, then you will taste what the hell I'm talking about. There is no one to call, you can't tell anyone, no one believes you, you feel like a rape victim, you fear for your very life. No judge will do anything about it, they'll assume your guilty, and you will be there helpless. The only thing left for you to do is sit there and fucking take it, because he's a cop and he's always right. You'll understand 1 day when you're staring down the barrel of a gun, that's being held by someone who is paid by YOUR tax dollar, and all you can do is hope this isn't the day you die. If being a big drunk asshole was punishable by death, spofi's membership would be cut by 1/4, and that's a generous estimate.

posted by Bishop at 06:00 PM on September 04, 2006

These actions are punishable by being shot or having your dumb ass beat up by arresting officers: "punching a cop" can sure as hell get you killed by one, Bishop, and justifiably so. Stopping you car not once, but 3 times after you have been ordered to. Getting out of the vehicle and walking toward the officer after he has identified himself and told you not to advance any farther, and having an accomplice get behind the wheel and drive beside you in the direction of the officer. Steering the car toward the officer after he has identified himself and fired a warning shot at the car, then coming at the officer and putting a hand in your waistband. Look at this, and this, and no telling what else you can dig up on Foley, and tell me he doesn't have a problem realizing that laws apply to his dumb ass as well as anyone else, and that he obviously can't handle his liquor. Until some evidence somes forward that exonerates Foley, which I HIGHLY doubt, I'm taking the cops side on this one.

posted by mjkredliner at 06:37 PM on September 04, 2006

1. Like bdaddy said, this is a 6'4'' 240 lbs guy who has previously been charged with resisting arrest Since when is being big and punching a cop punishable by DEATH? Funny how you left out the rest of my comment, stating that Foley was coming after the cop and Gaut was steering a car at him. It wasn't that he is just a big guy, its a big guy that is advancing on an officer and possibly reaching for a gun. And like I said earlier, I don't think the cop was shooting to kill. Holy shit, he ALMOST caused a car accident. Frag his ass. So are you saying that the officer shouldn't have puller over Foley and left the possibility of him hitting a van full of kids in an intersection and killing them all? The cop knew he had help coming. Maybe I read the article and above comments wrong but I didn't see anything about the officer calling for backup. Of course maybe you're an insider with the police force and have insight the rest of us don't have. It that's true then why don't you just give us the inside scoop and not waste time arguing. Come on people, this is America. Since when is it ok to shoot someone because your scared? If you're scared of a big guy, get in your car, or get a new line of work. I would think that it isn't just an issue of being scared, but an issue where the officer is worried about what may happen. He had a huge, black man (and don't call me racist, those are the facts) coming at him, possibly reaching for a gun and his girlfriend is moving at you with a car. If he pulls a gun, it could be all over for the cop. But of course he shouldn't be scared right? He should just whip out his Superman powers and block all the bullets if Foley pulls a gun. And lets not forget that Gaut is currently being held under suspicion for assualt with a deadly weapon. I don't give a fuck if you're a Navy SEAL, to say somebody wouldn't blink an eyelash when someone may be about to assault or even kill you with something like a car is absolute bullshit.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 06:47 PM on September 04, 2006

First off, for the cop to know he was going as fast as 90MPH he had to going that fast also. He was in his own car with know lights or siren. That means there were two idiots weaving in and out of traffic. Second, more then one of the comments on here point out that Foley had a prior for risisting arrest. You know this because the news story says so. This off-duty cop had know way of knowing this, because he had no radio or computer to run the plates. He had know idea who he was dealing with. Third, He couldn't pepper spray or use his taser because he was off-duty. In other words he did not have the tools of his trade to do the job. There is no doubt that being a cop is a very tough job, or that a traffic stop at that time of night can go bad in in the blink of a eye. So why put yourself in a situation like that? Why not just take down the plate number and report it. He was not equipped to make a traffic stop and should not have tried. Ask yourself this, if someone pulled up along side you at that time of night, said they were a cop and told you to pull over, would you?

posted by CB900 at 07:17 PM on September 04, 2006

I don't know about you but I don't think the officer was shooting to kill. I think he was shooting to stop his advance, not to kill him. This comment speaks to a terrible ignorance of physics or guns or possibly both. AFAIK, officers are trained to shoot at the center of mass to make sure they hit something. And there's a reason it's referred to as "lethal force". You've seen one too many Westerns if you think a cop was trying to knock the ring off his finger. mjk, I don't know I would disagree with any of your points except the only source/ "facts" you've cited seem to be the claims of the officer involved.

posted by yerfatma at 07:22 PM on September 04, 2006

I'm quite certain that a thorough investigation into the shooting will be held, and I am also reasonably certain that the officer will be found to have used lethal force justifiably. Write your Senators and Congressmen if any of you don't think this was a good idea. I think it is.

posted by mjkredliner at 10:15 PM on September 04, 2006

Maybe I read the article and above comments wrong but I didn't see anything about the officer calling for backup. Of course maybe you're an insider with the police force and have insight the rest of us don't have. I read the article, which you obviously didn't do mister inside info. If you would take the time to read the article or at least my entire post, instead of assuming, you would see that a neighbor stated: "I heard a female scream, 'Let it go! No, no, no!' And then four more shots. I heard more screaming and then two more shots and in seconds the first marked officer showed up." Are you suggesting that "seconds" after shots were fired someone called the cops and they had enough time to get to this remote upscale community? It's obvious he called for back up. How else did the other police get there? They had just pulled up to his house. They weren't there 5 minutes. This is in several accounts of the episode. There, do you understand now? Are you reading this? Do you see where I got this info? 3 apples-2 oranges=1piece of fruit. YingYang, You often offer some well thought out insight into to certain subjects, but in this case I'm forced to recommend that you stay in a child's place (it's true you are a 15-16 yr old kid. those are the facts). You may ask what your age has to do with it? I offer the same question to you about Foley's race when you say; He had a huge, black man (and don't call me racist, those are the facts) coming at him We don't even know yet whether the policeman was white or black, yet you offer fear as the officer's excuse because Foley is huge and black. Now that we know you must be afraid of huge black men (for what ever reason), you now suggest that this is a good enough reason to open fire? And if not, you obviously believe it aided in the officer's fear (with out even knowing his race)? You have the fucking nerve to talk about inside info? Don't worry youngster, big bad black men aren't going to get you. I don't give a shit how you spin it, it's not ok to shoot huge black men just because YOU are scared of them. Let's just say for 1 second that this cop was being a hard ass, are you ignorant enough to believe that he would come out and say that? Or do you think he would immediately start saying shit like, "he reached in his waistband"? mjk, your opinions have time and time again been proved to not be worth responding to. Write T$sport4grammerschool if you don't agree with me.

posted by Bishop at 11:28 PM on September 04, 2006

Foley ought to behave himself, I hope his night of fun was worth the 1.6 million the Chargers WON'T be paying him this year... Jail and Rehab sound like a pretty good deal for him, maybe he can wake up.

posted by mjkredliner at 01:14 AM on September 05, 2006

I hope he files suit against the police dept and doesn't have to work again in his life time. Your life sounds like a pretty good place for no one. Seems like we have another one afraid of huge black men. There's a surprise.

posted by Bishop at 01:30 AM on September 05, 2006

My comments are based upon him being a repeat offender in instances of resisting arrest and DWI. The idiocy of your last comment speaks for itself.

posted by mjkredliner at 01:43 AM on September 05, 2006

MJK, he had no fucking idea who he was pulling over. He had no way to ascertain that information, because he was not on duty and had no way to run his plate. Even if he did know who it was, past charges do not give him the right to try and kill him. Any one who thinks it is possible to shoot someone with any other intent, have no grasp on reality. as soon as this cop felt he was not in control of the situation he should have backed down and waited for help. I am so fucking tired of this post 9/11 mentality of shoot first and to hell with constitutional rights. I can't how many people are willing to take the cops word at face value.

posted by CB900 at 02:30 AM on September 05, 2006

Read my comments, CB. Never, ever, did I once say the cop had any idea about his past record. Those are MY sentiments. Judging by Foley's past record, he OBVIOUSLY has not learned that there are laws against drinking and driving, and that when an officer has a reason (as he most certainly did in this case) to detain, frisk, or whatever,(valid, or not) they, as a law abiding citizen, should COMPLY with the officers demands. If you choose to get frisky, then you run the chance of getting your dumb ass shot. Your post 9/11 hysteria seems a bit unreasonble, perhaps you should read a bit of law, and realize that the officer was well within his rights to stop Mr. Foley, and that Mr. Foley acted in a manner that justified using lethal force, if, indeed the police reports are true. Would you care to place a wager on the outcome of the investigation?

posted by mjkredliner at 03:48 AM on September 05, 2006

Read my comments, CB. Never, ever, did I once say the cop had any idea about his past record. You did, however, state that he was "a repeat offender in instances of resisting arrest and DWI." It has yet to be established that he is a "repeat offender" of anything -- certainly it wasn't established at the time -- and it has yet to be established that he has ever committed DWI. Careless in one, careless in all?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:01 AM on September 05, 2006

I may be right off my rocker, but I generally don't put DUIs into the realm of shoot to kill. That's the part that bothers me. I'm not necessarily against an off-duty officer trying to stop a dangerous driver, but pulling out a gun and firing several times, hitting the guy three times, seems a bit much. His (the officer's) goal was to get him off the roads and out of the car, and he apparently had accomplished that. But escalating it to heavy gunfire? That will be a tough one to explain. There had to be other options.

posted by dyams at 07:28 AM on September 05, 2006

Would you care to place a wager on the outcome of the investigation? This is the part that bothers me. I already know the outcome regardless of how justified the officer was. Police brutality is rampant in this country and the accountability for shooting unarmed people is a joke.

posted by bperk at 08:55 AM on September 05, 2006

Since when is being big and punching a cop punishable by DEATH? Threatening a police officer's life IS punishable by death. Advancing on a police officer who has his gun drawn certainly falls into that category. Especially if your partner is trying to run him over at the same time. Did you watch the video I linked to? That is a case of what happens if a police officer does not defend himself. Holy shit, he ALMOST caused a car accident. Frag his ass. Drunk Driving is the fourth leading killer in the United States. Yea, we wouldn't want to do anything to deter a simple "car accident".

posted by bdaddy at 09:09 AM on September 05, 2006

Drunk Driving is the fourth leading killer in the United States. Bullshit alert!!

posted by bperk at 09:28 AM on September 05, 2006

the accountability for shooting unarmed people is a joke. Believe you me, an automobile is a very deadly weapon. I do not have statistics to back my claim, but I would bet that several officers per year are killed by suspects that use their vehicle as a weapon. But escalating it to heavy gunfire? Cops make mistakes, and we all know that there are bad cops in the barrel. But, I think that Mr. Foley and his accomplice are the ones that escalated this to a situation that required the use of lethal force, not vice-versa. What we really need to do is reign in all these police officers that drive around looking for pro athletes/choir boys to hang charges on. Police brutality is a problem, but I suggest that if you had to deal with hoodlums like Mr. Foley and his accomplice on a day to day basis, you too, would be a little on edge. Suggestion to all would be criminals: If an armed officer of the law tells you to do something, do it, or he may have a very unpleasant way of making you see the powers of his authority to make such demands.

posted by mjkredliner at 09:35 AM on September 05, 2006

mjk, you're right about one thing: not cooperating with a cop who's threatening you with a gun is probably a bad idea. Probably. "Armed officers of the law" have used their weapons and authority to commit crimes against unoffending people, and it's not always so clear what you should do if you're the victim in such a situation, but we'll leave that out. Apart from that one statement, though, how is it you're so certain of the truth when the fact of the case have yet to be established, and when witness accounts don't entlrely agree with what the police have said? Answer: because you're prejudging. You persist in using words like "repeat offender" and "hoodlum" to refer to Foley; clearly your mind is made up, and we shouldn't confuse you with facts, hmm?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 10:02 AM on September 05, 2006

Sportsfilter: I do not have statistics to back my claim

posted by yerfatma at 10:18 AM on September 05, 2006

YingYang, You often offer some well thought out insight into to certain subjects, but in this case I'm forced to recommend that you stay in a child's place (it's true you are a 15-16 yr old kid. those are the facts). You may ask what your age has to do with it? Yeah I do ask. What the fuck does age have to do with anything in this arguement. Or more importantly, what the fuck is a child's place. Why should age matter in whether or not somebody can discuss something. I've got news for you, it shouldn't. We don't even know yet whether the policeman was white or black, yet you offer fear as the officer's excuse because Foley is huge and black. Now that we know you must be afraid of huge black men (for what ever reason), you now suggest that this is a good enough reason to open fire? And if not, you obviously believe it aided in the officer's fear (with out even knowing his race)? There was the possiblity that it could have aided his fear. Maybe it didn't maybe it did. There are people all over the United States of America who are scared of people because they are black. I am not one of them, I am simply suggesting that the officer could be one of them. Most likely he isn't but the possibility is still there.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 10:31 AM on September 05, 2006

I'm still not sure, especially based on the limited facts the public has about this situation, how you are indeed supposed to know if a person claiming to be an off-duty cop actually is what they claim to be. What advice do you give to your wife, for example, if a person in a civilian car, probably with a badge of some sort, along with a weapon, makes requests of her? I'm sure we've all heard stories about women who've been attacked and assaulted by imposters doing just this type of thing. Even though Foley obviously has some severe issues, he remains a wealthy man living in an upscale neighborhood who could still be a easy target for criminals or those with bad intentions. I still stand by the idea, until I hear other proof, that a out-of-uniform cop probably needs to avoid, at all costs, firing his weapon at a civilian, and if he thinks Foley (in this instance) is a danger to him, get back in his own car, put a little distance between himself and Foley, then keep some sort of eye on the situation until uniformed backup responds. Just because a person is employed as a law officer doesn't mean they're not stressed out, high-strung, and capable of making crucial, spur of the moment judgments, especially when face-to-face with a large, imposing man. I'm dead-set against anyone driving when their ability is obviously impaired, and yes, vehicles can cause huge, huge damage, but this person had already arrived home, was out of his car, and wasn't, at that particular moment, a real DWI risk.

posted by dyams at 10:32 AM on September 05, 2006

What the fuck does age have to do with anything in this arguement. Interactions with the police do change when you turn 18. And while grey hair does not confer wisdom, time does give some a wider perspective.

posted by yerfatma at 11:53 AM on September 05, 2006

It is still attacking the person not the argument since YYM's response was not really different from a bunch of old folks responding on this thread.

posted by bperk at 12:13 PM on September 05, 2006

My comments are based upon him being a repeat offender in instances resisting of arrest and DWI. MJK, these are your very words, and I repeat what I said, his past record has nothing to do with what happened that night. I am basing my comments on the facts that are known. 1. The officer was off duty. 2. He was not driving a squad car, he was driving a car with no lights, radio or computer. 3. He fired eight shots in a residential area, at an unarmed man. 4. The reason he gave for shooting was that he reached for his wastband. No weapon was reported to have been found. 5. He determined without a field sobriety test or breathalyser test that Foley was drunk. Having a badge does not mean you have unlimited power to run roughshod over the populace. The whole situation could have been defused if he had just called for help.I have on more than one occasion called to report something I have seen on the interstate. The response time was a matter of moments. Turn the situation around and say it's the cop who kills someone while he is doing 90 trying to pull Foley over. By trying to keep up with Foley he doubled the amount of danger to the public

posted by CB900 at 12:21 PM on September 05, 2006

The older I get the less I trust cops. There are too many stories about cops tasing a 67 year old grandmother 4 times, half a dozen cops beating a black teenager to death at a juvenile facility, a deputy ordering a man to his feet then shooting him 4 times, and just this morning, a cop killing an unarmed homeless man in a grocery store in San Mateo. Cops are way too goddamned fast to pull that piece and shoot first, then ask questions later like it was the old west. The old "hand at the waist" excuse is wearing pretty thin. I'll also wait for more details, but nothing I have heard or read so far justifies 8 shots fired.

posted by irunfromclones at 12:28 PM on September 05, 2006

Now, I know I shouldn't even comment as most of the comments here are being berated by those on the other side of the argument, but I do feel there are a few items that remain left out of the equation. Such as, the idea that Foley was approaching the off-duty officer. Were I pulled over by a guy who says he's a cop, I'd politely ask to see his badge, and, ideally, request to call the cops myself. Most guys with a gun either fire right away for fun, or have to make a decision to fire when the situation gets out of control. If this guy turns out not to be a cop, then you're probably out a wallet and a car. Big deal. Maybe I'm a bit naive, but I like to take people at their word until they give me a reason not to. A guy identifies himself as a cop, brandishing a firearm...I'm not going to start walking toward him at all. I'm definitely not going to reach near my belt. I'm going to keep my hands where he can see them, and I'm going to request my rights and keep the situation calm. Maybe I'll end up in a bad situation this way, some day; but hopefully I can encourage the best to come from every situation until that time. This story, I think, brings up the question of what we want as fans, as well. I know we can support the athlete on the field, then distance ourselves when he's incarcerated; calling him "idiot," "fool," and several other degrading names. Don't we also badmouth the guys who are beneficial to society off the field? Oh, he can do that because he's rich. He's so stuck up. I'm of the opinion that we have to support (or not support) the whole athlete, not just the man on the field. Granted, it is a difficult thing to do with as minor an impact one fan can have in relation to one player. However, 100,000 letters to the NFL are hard to ignore.

posted by Thisguy at 12:30 PM on September 05, 2006

I'm of the opinion that we have to support (or not support) the whole athlete, not just the man on the field. I disagree. We hardly know anything about most of them. They could be great guys or they could be jerks. I think it is a safer course just to appreciate their athletic abilities and leave it at that.

posted by bperk at 01:23 PM on September 05, 2006

Were I pulled over by a guy who says he's a cop, I'd politely ask to see his badge, and, ideally, request to call the cops myself. If you're female, you better be calling 911 before he pulls you over. And you'd better not pull over in an isolated spot. That goes whether he's a cop or an imposter. If this guy turns out not to be a cop, then you're probably out a wallet and a car. Big deal. And maybe you're out much more. There were incidents a few years ago in MA involving women who were assaulted after being pulled over by a guy, not a cop, who had some mailorder badge and a bubble on the dash. I don't think you'll find cops pulling people over for moving violations when they're off-duty, out of uniform and driving their own cars -- not in this state.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:48 PM on September 05, 2006

Amen to that, bperk. Here is a more concise report of the incident. It really means little what any of us think about this, it will be decided by the proper authorites, whose job it is to pass judgement, unlike us. The potential for wrong, by both Foley, and the deputy, is great. I normally do not comment on a persons first brush with the law, but repeat offenses, or first offenses that involve violence and victims, indicate a need for incarceration to me, and a lack of respect for the law and other people rights, so, in effect, Foley has used his grace period in my book, and I admit that I have prejudged him. It will all come out in the wash...

posted by mjkredliner at 02:08 PM on September 05, 2006

Drunk Driving is the fourth leading killer in the United States. Bullshit alert!! Sorry...wasn't my intention to mislead, just read the quote I took it from to quickly. It's actually the 4th leading cause of "accidental" deaths is what I should have posted.

posted by bdaddy at 02:22 PM on September 05, 2006

and I admit that I have prejudged him This is exactly what I attacked and will continue to. Did you see what was released about the officer? He apparently has been with the force for 1 year. He is hardly a veteran of the dept. Some of you on the other side of this argument have no clue who you are backing. This guy could be a worse offender that Foley is, he could be a child molester, racist, nutcase, the whole nine yards. That actually speaks volumes about how some people view others different from themselves. Ying Yang mistakenly made reference to Foley's race, if there is a human being given authority over others, he damn sure better not be afraid of someone because of their race. That is total bullshit. Yingyang, I just mentioned your age during an internet discussion, and look how offended you got; What the fuck does age have to do with anything in this arguement. Or more importantly, what the fuck is a child's place. Why should age matter in whether or not somebody can discuss something. I've got news for you, it shouldn't Do you see my point now? All that from one mention of your age. Now just imagine how Foley feels if what you say is true. The cop may have been scared because Foley is big and black and there are a lot of people afraid of black men. Is that Foley's fault? You snap about your age being mentioned because you feel it's a nonfactor and should have no influence on the merit of your argument or on how people should view it. Well some feel the same way when race is mentioned or considered. It's the same thing. It's prejudging someone based on factors that should have no influence on any laws or on any legal situation presented. Foley's race should never be considered a justifiable factor when the decision to take his life is made. That would be considered the very essence of racism. There are people all over the United States of America who are scared of people because they are black. I am not one of them, I am simply suggesting that the officer could be one of them. Most likely he isn't but the possibility is still there. To offer this as additional justification for this cop's right to shoot whomever he pleases is sickening and disgraceful. It's the same as me saying I reserve the right to whip your ass with a belt because you're a teenager. Just because someone is young and makes mistakes doesn't mean they should be beaten for every one. Foley screwed up a few months ago, that gives the cops the right to whip his ass/shoot him dead whenever they get good and ready? Partly because he's black and scary and has been known to fuck up? If Foley is such a rampant criminal and "repeat offender", why is he not in jail? He had a huge, black man (and don't call me racist, those are the facts) coming at him, possibly reaching for a gun What if he was reaching for his cell phone, which a lot of people keep on their belt. WHERE IS THE WEAPON? Are you starting to see the point now? I don't give a fuck if you are T.J. Hooker, Barney Miller, or Robocop, if you start popping of shots at me while I'm in front of my house, you can believe that I will try to run your ass over too. I don't think some of you realize what you are saying. Basically it's ok for cops to shoot people that walk towards them. (if they are deemed scary or a different race then the cop) It's pretty easy to see that this cop had his God complex fucked with, somebody disobeyed him, and he didn't like it. Probably the same type of guy that would beat his kids and wife because they won't do everything he says. A power hungry control freak. The worse type of offender, an abuser of power. He was popping off shots well before anyone drove any car anywhere near his direction. Some of you continue to say he was dealing with a drunk driver. Please link the blood tests or other evidence showing he was impaired. Besides having no weapon, it has yet to be proved that he was even drunk or drinking. That's right, he was drunk back in April, so he must have been drunk this time as well because mjkredliner says so.

posted by Bishop at 08:09 PM on September 05, 2006

Bishop, you treated Ying Yang with condescension and contempt, and his response was justified. Don't try to come off as the voice of rationality and maturity now; your original dismissal of him was more childish than anything he's had to say in this thread. Furthermore, your critical reading skills could use some work. As you quoted above, Ying Yang said, "There are people all over the United States of America who are scared of people because they are black. I am not one of them, I am simply suggesting that the officer could be one of them." He did not "offer this as additional justification for this cop's right to shoot whomever he pleases". You owe him an apology for suggesting that he did, you owe him an apology for using others' words in a way to suggest that Ying Yang had said them. Meanwhile, check out the difference between the words "cause" and "justification". The distinction is an important one, and it has clearly eluded you. It's pretty easy to see that this cop had his God complex fucked with, somebody disobeyed him, and he didn't like it. Probably the same type of guy that would beat his kids and wife because they won't do everything he says. A power hungry control freak. The worse type of offender, an abuser of power. It's pretty easy to see that there are a number of people in this thread who are deluding themselves that they know all the details about what happened, including what happened in people's minds. You're one of them, Bishop.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:56 PM on September 05, 2006

This guy could be a worse offender that Foley is, he could be a child molester, racist, nutcase, the whole nine yards. Basically it's ok for cops to shoot people that walk towards them. (if they are deemed scary or a different race then the cop) Dude, your are going RZA all over again. Stop it. Since when is being big and punching a cop punishable by DEATH? Since when is it a cops duty to get his/her ass kicked? Letting someone beat their ass, isn't part of the program. Do you really think they should let themselves be beaten? Or maybe, Bishop, if the cop had just tazed him, there wouldn't be any problems. Right? I hope he files suit against the police dept and doesn't have to work again in his life time. Yeah, I bet if the child molesting cop just tazed him there wouldn't be any trouble at all.

posted by tselson at 09:46 PM on September 05, 2006

You owe him an apology for suggesting that he did, you owe him an apology for using others' words in a way to suggest that Ying Yang had said them Lbb, Yingyang: He had a huge, black man (and don't call me racist, those are the facts) coming at him, possibly reaching for a gun Lbb, these are his words. What part of this don't you understand? What I am asking, in a nutshell is, What the hell does his race have to do with whether he was reaching for a gun or not? Enter his second statement, "a lot of people in the US are afraid of black people". You have the nerve to ask why a black person has a problem with this? Your translation of these statements is, "I owe him an apology"? I'll just hope you have misunderstood some part of this discussion. Bishop, you treated Ying Yang with condescension and contempt, and his response was justified. I said: YingYang, You often offer some well thought out insight into to certain subjects, but in this case I'm forced to recommend that you stay in a child's place (it's true you are a 15-16 yr old kid. those are the facts). You may ask what your age has to do with it? I offer the same question to you about Foley's race when you say; He had a huge, black man (and don't call me racist, those are the facts) coming at him I obviously made mention of his age in the same manner he is making mention of Foley's race. He responded with, "what the fuck does age have to do with this", which is the same question I'm asking about Foley's race. You have a problem with that? In essence what is being said is "it's understandable if the cop was scared enough to try and kill , after all he had a huge black man coming toward him". I'm standing my ground on this one, whether the Republicans like it or not. tselson, I knew it wouldn't be long before you or your alter ego T$port showed up spouting some half ass BS 3/4's through the thread. I know where you stand when it comes to matters like this. The argument that the cop may have been afraid of him because he was black is more than understandable to you.

posted by Bishop at 02:45 AM on September 06, 2006

Dude, your are going RZA all over again. Stop it. You mean another black member suggesting that race in America still matters? Heaven forfend. Stop it right now, Mr. Bishop. I won't hear such lies.

posted by yerfatma at 06:15 AM on September 06, 2006

Some more info in this ESPN story... And a column from Yeterday in a San Diego paper with some questions that we should all stop and think about. We have no idea what happened. For all we know the cop was out boozing and was pissed becuase Foley cut him off. Or Foley may have gotten out of his car and told the cop he better shoot him because if he doesn't, he'll kill him. Who knows?

posted by SummersEve at 06:23 AM on September 06, 2006

If we could only find a happy medium, say, somewhere between mjkredliner and Bishop, oh, what a wonderful world it would be... My suggestion is that we all try to agree on two points: 1. It often sucks to be a police officer; 2. It often sucks to be a black man. Have a nice day.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 08:04 AM on September 06, 2006

There is an article in SI that explains the situation a little better. Foley had no weapon and did not deserve to get shot 3 time. What's a shame is that people are not looking at the bigger picture here. We're talking about an off-duty cop that's been on the force for a little over a year. Before that, he was a security gaurd. Com'on people, here's a guy that is so 'gung-ho' about being in law enforcement that he would give a person that jaywalks a ticket. There are peace officers out there that have not had to shoot their gun in 20 years but this guy that's been a cop for a year fires his weapon at an un-armed suspect 8 times? The article also states that the off-duty cop had his badge on his right-side of his belt and may not have flashed it to Foley. And by the way, my last comment I said that the officer would be suspended WITH pay and that's exactly what has happened.

posted by BornIcon at 08:20 AM on September 06, 2006

Sportsfilter: I do not have statistics to back my claim. Not that it was necessary, as anyone knows that my claim regarding officers being killed by suspects cars is true, but here ya go. I'm standing my ground on this one, whether the Republicans like it or not. This Republican couldn't give a shit. You trying to turn this into a racial/party line squabble is what calls for a bullshit alert.

posted by mjkredliner at 09:22 AM on September 06, 2006

You mean another black member suggesting that race in America still matters? Heaven forfend. Stop it right now, Mr. Bishop. I won't hear such lies. No, I mean another member who continuously suggests that it is all that matters. You know that. The argument that the cop may have been afraid of him because he was black is more than understandable to you. I never made that argument. tselson, I knew it wouldn't be long before you or your alter ego T$port showed up I don't have an alter ego, I have an evil twin. He steals my socks.

posted by tselson at 09:48 AM on September 06, 2006

BornIcon, every law enforcement agency in the country suspends officers (with pay) involved in a shooting pending completion of all investigative procedures as to the causes(s) of the shooting. Hardly a revelation.

posted by mjkredliner at 10:21 AM on September 06, 2006

Bishop: Lbb, these are his words. What part of this don't you understand? What I am asking, in a nutshell is, What the hell does his race have to do with whether he was reaching for a gun or not? Enter his second statement, "a lot of people in the US are afraid of black people". I understand it a good deal better than you appear to. I understand that Ying Yang is not saying what you seem to think he's saying, which is some version of, "Well of course he started shooting when this big black man started walking toward him, any sane person would!" Ying Yang is talking about an attitude that many people have, he's not endorsing that as a good or apppropriate attitude. He's talking about what is; he is most definitely not saying that's the way it should be. I know this is a sore spot with you, and I can understand why, but I don't see why you don't get the difference between saying, "This is the attitude some people have," and saying "This is the attitude some people have, and that's a good thing."

posted by lil_brown_bat at 10:23 AM on September 06, 2006

You mean another black member suggesting that race in America still matters? Heaven forfend. Stop it right now, Mr. Bishop. I won't hear such lies. Actually, strike "another" and insert "the same." Alter egos? He has three.

posted by tselson at 10:55 AM on September 06, 2006

I am not going to get into the fight over weather this was about race or if the cop was afraid of him because he is black. Insted I ask this, how many Americans are afraid of the cop that pulls them over. In Milwaukee this summer a mentally ill man died after an on duty officer used a taser on him. The officer claims he used it five times, however the tell tail chip in the gun said he used it on him twelve times. Also in Milwaukee six drunk, off duty cops beat the shit out of a man on a public street because one of them thought the guy had stolen his badge and gun. The cops who reasponded to the call from a neighbor tried to cover up what happened. The cop that started the whole thing was on paid leave for two years. The guy they beat was in the hospital for a month. These are just two cases that come to mind, I know there are alot more. So I hope you will forgive me if I don't put my hands behind my back and get on the ground for some guy who says he's a cop. I can see where I might do the same thing as Foley did. Some guy who says he's a cop but does not show a badge, is not in a squad car or in uniform, tries to pull me over, no fucking way do I just pull over. It sounds to me like Foley was doing the same thing I would do, try to get home. The officer may say he was following Foley and trying to pul him over, Foley may have thought some crazy fucker with a gun was chaseing him. I think the stats Eve brings up work against what this officer did. If you know that this is what could happen when your on duty and have all the tools of the trade with you, why would you put yourself in that situation when your off duty?

posted by CB900 at 01:02 PM on September 06, 2006

Alter egos? He has three. I hope you know this to be fact and are not basing it merely on the arguments that he is making.

posted by bperk at 01:59 PM on September 06, 2006

I can't say if it's better news collection processes, or if the number of incidents of police violence is climbing, but there is hardly a day goes by that there isn't a story of some cop or cops using what appears to be excessive force. I have to add that my own personal experience has also deeply altered my perception of police and their relationship to the community. It was a minor traffic incident and I was not at fault, but the cops behavior and attitude made it seem like a felony police action. They were very threatening and intimidating not just in their speech but their actions. If you have never had a cop angrily walk towards you with his hand on the butt of his gun than perhaps you will have trouble understanding my feelings. I thought the whole thing was humorous until this bozo stalked towards me and I realized that these cowboys could have easily over-reacted. I now see cops more as predators than protectors, too often reaching for that gun as the first alternative to any situation. I am very apprehensive about having any cop pull me over.

posted by irunfromclones at 02:09 PM on September 06, 2006

In reading this thred and thinking about some of my encounters with the local constabulary, I know I would not stop for someone who just said they were a cop. I ride a motorcycle and have long hair. When its not to hot I wear a black leather coat. I was stoped sometime back and the officer asked what I was doing in that part of town. He ran my plate and checked for warrants then told me he did not want to see me in his part of town any more that night. When I ask why he pulled me over, his answer was, no particular reason. I have mellowed with age, but I could see a time in my life that it could have gotten ugly.

posted by CB900 at 02:50 PM on September 06, 2006

I think the stats Eve brings up work against what this officer did. I don't have a cow in this milking machine. I think you mean MJK.

posted by SummersEve at 02:53 PM on September 06, 2006

You mean another black member suggesting that race in America still matters? Heaven forfend. Stop it right now, Mr. Bishop. I won't hear such lies. Except RZA wasn't black, he was an Italian trolling for a school project. He admitted as much to me via email.

posted by tron7 at 03:03 PM on September 06, 2006

Sorry EVE it was MJK who put those stats up.

posted by CB900 at 03:10 PM on September 06, 2006

"In Milwaukee this summer a mentally ill man died after an on duty officer used a taser on him." Yeah, so what? From the linked article " All of the people they were used on were offering some form of resistance." "Also in Milwaukee, six drunk, off duty cops beat the shit out of a man on a public street because one of them thought the guy had stolen his badge and gun." Verdict: Not Guilty. However, I can see why cops would be forced to be assholes in America's Drunkest City.

posted by mjkredliner at 04:32 PM on September 06, 2006

"Also in Milwaukee, six drunk, off duty cops beat the shit out of a man on a public street because one of them thought the guy had stolen his badge and gun." Verdict: Not Guilty. Not Quite. From the article you linked to: "In a late-night decision Friday, a Milwaukee jury acquitted three white off-duty policemen of nearly all charges in the bloody beating of an unarmed biracial man outside a house party where several off-duty officers were present. [emphasis mine] Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, mjk. However, I can see why cops would be forced to be assholes in America's Drunkest City. You mean, because it's America's Drunkest City according to Forbes.com, cops are forced to be drunken assholes? If you can't do a job and conduct yourself in a professional manner, then you shouldn't take the job. If you can't help screaming at the sight of blood, you don't take a job as a nurse; if you can't help but yell, "Cool!" at the sight of a burning building, you don't take a job as a firefighter; and if you can't have a drink without abusing your authority and beating people up, you don't take a job as a cop.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:54 PM on September 06, 2006

I can't believe I missed this. Who doesn't love a good old SpoFi clusterfuck?

posted by jerseygirl at 05:20 PM on September 06, 2006

Ah well, 4 out of 5 ain't bad. The other is pending re-trial. I was referring to the fact that the cops may have to deal with an inordinate number of drunks...which, if you have ever had to do, gets rather old, and drunkeness makes a lot of people think they are bulletproof, hence, the alleged proclivity for use of force by MPD. Again, these are MY sentiments, not those of the police in question.

posted by mjkredliner at 05:45 PM on September 06, 2006

Jersey! We've missed you!

posted by ctal1999 at 07:01 PM on September 06, 2006

I can't believe I missed this. Who doesn't love a good old SpoFi clusterfuck? Jersey! We've missed you! And of course we can't recieve valuable input from members of the jerseygirl fan club.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 07:17 PM on September 06, 2006

This Republican couldn't give a shit. You trying to turn this into a racial/party line squabble is what calls for a bullshit alert Wow, to actually watch you wasting your time typing is funny to me. I never mentioned race, I addressed it after it was suggested that the cop may have been afraid in PART because Foley was black. You already admitted to prejudging Foley, now you have the nerve to suggest that I am turning this into a racial/party line. You said: If you choose to get frisky, then you run the chance of getting your dumb ass shot And you claim my response calls for a bullshit alert? Mjk, seriously man, all your posts offer excuses for cops to do whatever they want. You just can't grasp the fact that there is a strong possibility that a black man may be the victim in this case. Your hatred seeps through your words, it's ugly brother. I can only hope that something like this never happens to you or your family, because no one on earth deserves to be a victim of an over anxious cop, who obviously has little regard for human life. To watch some of you lament over how inexcusable it was for Foley to "almost" cause a car accident with his blatant disregard for human life, then in turn watch the same few say how justified this cop was for popping off 8 shots at an unarmed man is troubling to say the least. Ying Yang is talking about an attitude that many people have, he's not endorsing that as a good or appropriate attitude. He's talking about what is; he is most definitely not saying that's the way it should be. He had a huge, black man (and don't call me racist, those are the facts) coming at him, possibly reaching for a gun Lbb again I ask what his race has to do with? The same manner YYM didn't understand what his age has to do with it? The guy is a cop, a human being that has sworn to protect and to serve all races. To a policeman, race should be inconsequential. It should not be a factor when a decision to kill someone is made. When YYM suggested that it is understandable(whether he agreed or not) that the policeman may have been afraid of black men (because a lot of people in America are) the argument should then shift to how unacceptable that would be if it is indeed true. To me he was offering an excuse for the cop, that is in fact deplorable (whether its his personal opinion or not). Actually, strike "another" and insert "the same." Alter egos? He has three Except RZA wasn't black, he was an Italian trolling for a school project. He admitted as much to me via email. This is the second or third time I have been accused of being a rapper from the Wu Tang Clan. Wtf is this suppose to mean? I have news for you, Rza is not Italian, he is black, and I don't think he is a member of spofi. I am a member of Omega Si PHI from PHI ill adelPHIa, hooks high.

posted by Bishop at 07:25 PM on September 06, 2006

And of course we can't recieve valuable input from members of the jerseygirl fan club. Comment icon posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 7:17 PM CDT on September 6 The satin fan club jacket you ordered is in the mail, by the way. The pink lettering was cute, just like you thought it would be!

posted by jerseygirl at 07:45 PM on September 06, 2006

Virdict not guilty Yea , because the on duty cops tried to cover up what happened. Including fileing falsefied reports. One of the cops is now serving two years and, is facing Federal hate crime charges. I was referring to the fact that the cops may have to deal with an inordinate number of drunks... It was the cops that were drunk, not the victom. Every time you show me stats showing how tough it is for the cops to do their job,you reinforce my opinion that this cop should not have tried to pull Foley over. I would think they have these stats drilled into them, so as to know how not to get into this type of situation. All this asshole had to do was take down his plate number, call it in, and wait for back-up. Then him and his fellow officers could have gone to Foley's house and kicked the shit out of him. Instead Dirty Harry with his whole one year of service pushed the situation to the point of shooting him.

posted by CB900 at 08:07 PM on September 06, 2006

All Foley had to do was A. Not drive 90 mph, or, B. pull his car over any one of the 3 times he was asked to, and heed the commands of the officer, and we would be talking about none of this... very simple if you ask me.

posted by mjkredliner at 08:52 PM on September 06, 2006

I got another idea for some of you, you go to the Officer Down page I linked to earlier, click on each officers name, read how and why he died, and you tell me if you would take a chance with ANYBODY. This does not even include the 62,000 assaults on officers last year. Next time a cop pulls you over, I suggest you say "yes sir" and "no ma'am" if for no other reason than to show them the respect they deserve. No one is naive enough to deny that prejudice and other inequities exist among policemen, but for every story of a bad cop, I could tell you hundreds, maybe thousands of good stories.

posted by mjkredliner at 09:13 PM on September 06, 2006

Sounds like a good topic for email.

posted by justgary at 09:36 PM on September 06, 2006

This is the second or third time I have been accused of being a rapper from the Wu Tang Clan. Your words to YYM: but in this case I'm forced to recommend that you stay in a child's place (it's true you are a 15-16 yr old kid. those are the facts). RZA's words: I mean "ying yang mafia"? Please. This time you've stuck your nose in a little to far punk. Dont type things you wouldnt say face to face. I think its best for you to stay in a childs place. Your words in this thread: Some people's kid's.....why I oughtta.... Another Philly fans words: Some peoples kid's, why i outta......... posted by BlogZilla at 2:11 PM CDT on February 7 Their use of these phrases isn't the only thing you have in common with them. A quick trigger finger on pulling out the race card and a great sense of humor when not preoccupied with race are as well. Delete this free account because you disagree with me, and i'll just start another 1 on 1 of the 65 pc's i repair a day, or on 1 of my laptops with the 8 dial up networks i have access to. thats aprox. 70 different ip. addresses. you cant get rid of me. So begin to chill with most of the racist threads here, or maybe yahoo wont want to offer this forum as a link on their home page options. posted by RZA at 6:34 PM CDT on December 21 Am I insane? Wouldn't surprise me. You want to talk about the Vikings or Ron Artest some more? Cause I can't tell the difference between you or RZA or Blogzilla. I mean the NHL fights all the time and they aren't labeled thugs. Maybe the Vikings players should have claimed rape, eh? Broken f-n record. If I'm wrong, ban me. If I'm not, I hope you stick around longer than RZA and Blogzilla. Seriously, sports and humor, two of my favorite things. You are good at both, always have been. Where are my socks? Damn that evil twin.

posted by tselson at 10:11 PM on September 06, 2006

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.

Username:
Password:
(or sign up)