GK photo wrote:
there will be no reward.

And rightfully so.  That money should go to the people who's house got burned down... and to those poor newspaper delivery ladies who got their truck ruined and injured by those overzealous cops...

Select llamas wrote:
And rightfully so.  That money should go to the people who's house got burned down... and to those poor newspaper delivery ladies who got their truck ruined and injured by those overzealous cops...

insurance will take care of the house that burned down, and i believe the paper delivery women have already been offered an initial round of compensation. accent on initial.

jesus h, i should get the million for suffering through some of the posts in this thread.

Select Models wrote:

And rightfully so.  That money should go to the people who's house got burned down... and to those poor newspaper delivery ladies who got their truck ruined and injured by those overzealous cops...

That money should go to the families of the two officers Dorner murdered.

Compass Rose Studios wrote:
Let me be clear: I don't agree with his response.  AT ALL.  In fact I don't much believe in violence except in direct defense and under threat. 

That said, what if he's telling the truth about the LAPD?  What if they still condone open racism at an institutional level and turn a blind eye to an internal culture of accepted abuse and violence?

The truth in war, more often than not, is that neither side is "right" or "wrong", but they both have reasons to fight. The LAPD has reason to fight because they're paid to. Dorner has reason to fight because now he's got a million dollar bounty on his head. I'd imagine his reasons were just to begin with, but he took it too far and now he's in way too deep to turn back. theres no doubt in my mind LAPD is at least a bit crooked, but theres also no doubt in my mind this is a huge overreaction for Dorner... One he can't take back, so he's plunged in headfirst.

Violence is never the answer is a load of hogwash. But it really should be limited to self defense. The real question is, how many punches in self defense do you want to throw before you realize the other person is doing the same damn thing...

Sal W Hanna wrote:

The facts of that case do not support your argument. Police do have a duty to the public, read the oath.

Actually the facts and that case do. Did you bother to read it?

Christopher Hartman wrote:

This is why context is important.

I'm talking about a situation where the police are WITNESSING A CRIME.  It is their duty to do whatever they can reasonable do to STOP THE CRIME.  They don't get to sit there and just watch everything happen while eating donuts.

if someone says there is a crime and they don't see one and they don't make the extra effort to find it (as what happened in the first story).  That's just doing your job poorly.

And that isn't protecting the public, that is enforcing the law. Law enforcement has no duty or responsibility to protect the public. Their entire legal responsibility is to enforce the law. And those are NOT the same.

rfordphotos wrote:
That money should go to the families of the two officers Dorner murdered.

amen, both of which had two young children each. a trust fund should be setup for their education. i'm sure the guy with the dalmatian, and the family (you know, the maids) from big bear would be more than willing to go along with that.

and some should go to the quan and lawrence families too.

Al Lock Photography wrote:
And that isn't protecting the public, that is enforcing the law. Law enforcement has no duty or responsibility to protect the public. Their entire legal responsibility is to enforce the law. And those are NOT the same.

I think you got that twisted!  Many police agencies have their officers swear to "Serve and protect" their community.   They make arrests, but it is the judge that makes the decisions as to enforcing the law.   

I find this interesting;  Policemen often face a difficult decision every day on their beat: loyalty to their community versus loyalty to their fellow officers. Many departments have officers swear an oath to serve and protect without allowing "personal feelings, prejudices, animosities, or friendships" influence their actions. On the other hand, as policemen work alongside each other in the trenches, a "cop code" develops in which they often hide information and maintain a code of silence to protect fellow officers. These conflicting agendas have social consequences.

Read more@ Police Subcultures Vs. Law Enforcement Code of Ethics | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_6320027_polic … z2KrU60Nva

So basically the police are known to break the law when they step in and enforce the law their way ... without a judge or jury.  It's illegal, but of course with a "code of silence"  we don't hear about it unless we get justice served first hand by teh cops.  There are good cops and bad cops.  The good ones don't cross that line.  It's unfortunate that we'll never hear Chris Dorner's side of the story directly from him in a courtroom.  He was like a time bomb about to explode.  We need to be able to identify mentally unstable people before things like murderous rampages take place.

GK photo wrote:

amen, both of which had two young children each. a trust fund should be setup for their education. i'm sure the guy with the dalmatian, and the family (you know, the maids) from big bear would be more than willing to go along with that.

and some should go to the quan and lawrence families too.

Where is the "Like" button! 

GK photo wrote:

i've already retracted.

dude, you're so obsessed with this, you can't even get it together on this while you're debating this. Slow your roll.

GK photo wrote:

insurance will take care of the house that burned down, and i believe the paper delivery women have already been offered an initial round of compensation. accent on initial.

jesus h, i should get the million for suffering through some of the posts in this thread.

Or take a time out, because his point went over your head. No where did he say that those things won't and aren't covered. He was making a point about the police amok, where that money should go, regardless of what's paying what.

Legacys 7 wrote:

Or take a time out, because his point went over your head. No where did he say that those things won't and aren't covered. He was making a point about the police amok, where that money should go, regardless of what's paying what.

BINGO... thankyouverymuch...

Vivus Hussein Denuo wrote:
Bigger Thomas and "Native Son."  That's what this whole sad case makes me think of.

"No American Negro exists," James Baldwin once wrote, "who does not have his private Bigger Thomas living in his skull."

Nice. I love James Baldwin. Bigger Thomas indeed.

T wrote:

Nice. I love James Baldwin. Bigger Thomas indeed.

Dorner was a trained ex-soldier and cop, who encountered racism among fellow cops, went through channels to fix it and was stymied, and even punished for trying.  His Bigger Thomas was bound to get loose, and there was bound to be Hell to pay.

I hope the LAPD will see this tragedy as a teachable moment.  But I kind of think they won't.

GK photo wrote:

insurance will take care of the house that burned down, and i believe the paper delivery women have already been offered an initial round of compensation. accent on initial.

jesus h, i should get the million for suffering through some of the posts in this thread.

Insurance shouldn't have to cover police action.

To me, this is the responsibility of the public.  Whatever damage occurs from LE (good or bad) they need to clean up and fix.  They can sue Dorner's estate to recover losses.

Patchouli Nyx wrote:

I think the lady that owned the house was saying it used to be a post office as well way back in the day.

Even though it was rented out it held sentimental value to her.


at least she didn't get shot in the ass by the LAPD.

Give them time to find her.

Al Lock Photography wrote:
And that isn't protecting the public, that is enforcing the law. Law enforcement has no duty or responsibility to protect the public. Their entire legal responsibility is to enforce the law. And those are NOT the same.

You're right.


On an unrelated note, I'm writing to Major League baseball to enforce walking.  When a picture gives up a walk, the batter should be required to walk to 1st base.  If they run, it is no longer a walk and they should be called out.

Michael Bots wrote:
Scanner recording
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCdqybEfy9w#!

About 0:25    -- blood spatters outside front door   (wounded in "push back"?)
About 0:55    -- "we're going to go forward with the plan - with the burner"

they also knew what quadrant he was in in the house.

was this due to infrared imaging?

Vivus Hussein Denuo wrote:

Dorner was a trained ex-soldier and cop, who encountered racism among fellow cops, went through channels to fix it and was stymied, and even punished for trying.  His Bigger Thomas was bound to get loose, and there was bound to be Hell to pay.

I hope the LAPD will see this tragedy as a teachable moment.  But I kind of think they won't.

OBSERVATION:
A Black man claims LAPD officers discriminated against him, abused a mentally disabled person, and managed to have him terminated.

CONCLUSION:
All (or at least most) of LAPD is filled with racists and abusive personnel.

Isn't that like someone saying...

OBSERVATION:
A group of Black youths attacked a woman and raped her, then shot and killed a Hispanic teen in a drive-by shooting.

CONCLUSION:
All (or at least most) Black men are rapists, abusers and killers.

In my opinion, and in my experience (having lived in L.A. County my entire life and having worked around several police agencies, including LAPD), LAPD is no different than the community it serves.  Yes, there are some people in that community who are violent, unethical, immoral, corrupt, abusive, violent and even racist.  Likewise, LAPD, which has almost 10,000 employees, will have SOME people in it who are prone to these same tendencies.  SOME does not equate to ALL. 

Since the L.A. riots in 1992, most police departments throughout California, if not the nation, have held their officers to a higher standard and are very quick to investigate any claims of abuse, discrimination, or corruption.  In fact, by law EVERY personnel complaint filed against an officer, in California at least, must be investigated.  Police departments over the past 20 years have been very quick to discipline officers, which includes suspensions and demotions, if they find any fault in their performance.  Even more so when the action makes the news or is caught on video.

To be clear; I am NOT saying LAPD is made up of angels and saints who wear a gun.  They have their flawed people who willfully overstep their bounds and they have others who make mistakes, even though their intentions were good.  That does not mean all cops are idiots and/or power tripping.  As I've said before, there are some good, decent and intelligent men and women of all races, religions and sexual orientations out there trying to help our society.  If some of them felt Dorner had problems with his ability to do the challenging work LAPD requires, is it not reasonable to think they were actually looking out for the safety of the public and not actually discriminating against him?  Don't his actions as a result of losing his job support their idea that he was unstable?

Another thing to think about...

If LAPD is such a racist department, then how come (according to this article written last year: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0425/ … D-reformed) only 37% of the department is White?  How come Dorner addressed Black sergeants and above in his manifesto and called them "high value targets"?  Wouldn't a "racist" agency make it extremely difficult for minorities to not only get hired, but to also rise in the ranks?  Can people not recognize the efforts this agency has put in to make the workplace environment safe, ethical, fair and tolerant? 

If you take the Bigger Thomas mindset out of the situation and look at this whole incident objectively, is it not reasonable to believe Dorner was actually the one who had the problem?

AdelaideJohn1967 wrote:
But he got away........He outsmarted them

He got away alright, he got lit up and away to hell by the looks of it!



His remains have been positively identified by the LAPD, so it must have been him!

London Fog wrote:

He got away alright, he got lit up and away to hell by the looks of it!



His remains have been positively identified by the LAPD, so it must have been him!

Source? The media over here is saying that the body has **not** been pos. I.D.

London Fog wrote:
Here's the report...it's Yahoo and LAPD, so how could it possibly be wrong?

http://news.yahoo.com/burned-remains-id … 50273.html

This comment makes me laugh my ass off...

"Miller did not give a cause of death"

No shit, I'd say death by charcoaling is a good bet!

Huh. Wonder why no one else has picked it up. Oh well. Yep, I bet death by BBQ is probably spot on   Thanks for the link.

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
....

If you take the Bigger Thomas mindset out of the situation and look at this whole incident objectively, is it not reasonable to believe Dorner was actually the one who had the problem?

don't you think life is more complex than just dorner or just lapd being "the problem?"


I'm gonna guess you had a perfect storm here, of a guy who sounds like he went over the deep end but who in other circumstances would have been a productive, long standing member of society and a police department.

You have the LAPD with a history of racism and corruption who also has members who are good people.  Good people who are within a system that probably needs re-examination.

You have a training officer who might not have been a good fit with dorner, or who had issues herself, you have a review system that might be too internal, you have Dorner who came back from a year of military service who might have needed reintegration training or services first before being thrown onto the streets.

You have 2 sep sets of officers from 2 sep juris who shot up cars and people first and asked questions later.  And you have understandably upset but crazy SB sO yelling into their radios to "burn him up."

There's a lot of crap in this shit stew and rather than just dismissing it as "dorner's problem" I think after the funerals are over there are some politicians and administrators and LE departments that need to do some serious re-evaluations of policy and procedure.

Lohkee wrote:
Huh. Wonder why no one else has picked it up. Oh well. Yep, I bet death by BBQ is probably spot on   Thanks for the link.

Front and center on the LA Times online edition:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2 … ified.html

rfordphotos wrote:

Front and center on the LA Times online edition:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2 … ified.html

Yeah, CNN just put it up in their "breaking news" banner.

Patchouli Nyx wrote:
[...]

There's a lot of crap in this shit stew and rather than just dismissing it as "dorner's problem" I think after the funerals are over there are some politicians and administrators and LE departments that need to do some serious re-evaluations of policy and procedure.

It is pretty rare ( ) for us to agree.... But this is spot on.

This whole cascade of events simply cannot be boiled down to Dorner being a pissed off whistleblower.

LAPD (and most metro PD's) are known to have problems, deep systemic issues with racism, excessive use of force, etc etc. To say they dont exist is silly. To say they are the same they were 15 years ago is in my opinion equally silly.

Dorner, again, in my opinion, ended up being booted off the force because he wasnt a good fit for the job. They may well have used the wrong reasons in the review board, but hindsight certainly shows he was NOT mentally stable, he was carrying too much anger, he snapped and became a murderer. Not "good" cop material.

I wonder what his time in Afghanistan did to his mental state. PTSD is devastating, and without care, it poisons everyone around the "victim".

I worry that without the public scrutiny that his trial would have brought that there will be too little emphasis put on a sweeping, transparent look into the workings of LAPD.

rfordphotos wrote:

It is pretty rare ( ) for us to agree.... But this is spot on.

This whole cascade of events simply cannot be boiled down to Dorner being a pissed off whistleblower.

LAPD (and most metro PD's) are known to have problems, deep systemic issues with racism, excessive use of force, etc etc. To say they dont exist is silly. To say they are the same they were 15 years ago is in my opinion equally silly.

Dorner, again, in my opinion, ended up being booted off the force because he wasnt a good fit for the job. They may well have used the wrong reasons in the review board, but hindsight certainly shows he was NOT mentally stable, he was carrying too much anger, he snapped and became a murderer. Not "good" cop material.

I wonder what his time in Afghanistan did to his mental state. PTSD is devastating, and without care, it poisons everyone around the "victim".

I worry that without the public scrutiny that his trial would have brought that there will be too little emphasis put on a sweeping, transparent look into the workings of LAPD.

A - Show me where I said problems DON'T EXIST within LAPD.  If you read what I wrote again, you'll see that I said LAPD, just like the community it serves, has it's share of problem people.  My point is, that grouping the police as a whole and badmouthing them is no different than grouping an entire community or race as a whole and forming negative opinion of them based on the actions of some individuals within the group. 

B - Dorner never spent any time in combat.  He was stationed on a ship during his tour and never served on the front line.  I highly doubt he could reach the level of PTSD the troops on the ground have.  Sure, there might be stresses being in a war zone; but enough to cause him to snap the way he did?  I say no.

Patrick Walberg wrote:

I think you got that twisted!  Many police agencies have their officers swear to "Serve and protect" their community.   They make arrests, but it is the judge that makes the decisions as to enforcing the law.   

I find this interesting;  Policemen often face a difficult decision every day on their beat: loyalty to their community versus loyalty to their fellow officers. Many departments have officers swear an oath to serve and protect without allowing "personal feelings, prejudices, animosities, or friendships" influence their actions. On the other hand, as policemen work alongside each other in the trenches, a "cop code" develops in which they often hide information and maintain a code of silence to protect fellow officers. These conflicting agendas have social consequences.

Read more@ Police Subcultures Vs. Law Enforcement Code of Ethics | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_6320027_polic … z2KrU60Nva

So basically the police are known to break the law when they step in and enforce the law their way ... without a judge or jury.  It's illegal, but of course with a "code of silence"  we don't hear about it unless we get justice served first hand by teh cops.  There are good cops and bad cops.  The good ones don't cross that line.  It's unfortunate that we'll never hear Chris Dorner's side of the story directly from him in a courtroom.  He was like a time bomb about to explode.  We need to be able to identify mentally unstable people before things like murderous rampages take place.

Gonzales v. Castle Rock

Read it.

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
If LAPD is such a racist department, then how come (according to this article written last year: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0425/ … D-reformed) only 37% of the department is White?

Are you one of those people who believes that only white people can be racist?

rfordphotos wrote:

It is pretty rare ( ) for us to agree.... But this is spot on.

This whole cascade of events simply cannot be boiled down to Dorner being a pissed off whistleblower.

LAPD (and most metro PD's) are known to have problems, deep systemic issues with racism, excessive use of force, etc etc. To say they dont exist is silly. To say they are the same they were 15 years ago is in my opinion equally silly.

Dorner, again, in my opinion, ended up being booted off the force because he wasnt a good fit for the job. They may well have used the wrong reasons in the review board, but hindsight certainly shows he was NOT mentally stable, he was carrying too much anger, he snapped and became a murderer. Not "good" cop material.

I wonder what his time in Afghanistan did to his mental state. PTSD is devastating, and without care, it poisons everyone around the "victim".

I worry that without the public scrutiny that his trial would have brought that there will be too little emphasis put on a sweeping, transparent look into the workings of LAPD.

You have to remember that people can be the most sensible, rational human beings but reacting under fear can impair their judgement and their ability to express themselves. The fight or flight part of the brain is not something you can easily control, and in the mind of someone who's endured traumas and seen some messed up shit, there's even less control. I personally have suffered from PTSD, i know how frustrating it can be to have painful emotions but no memory to link it to. I think its perfectly reasonable to assume that Dorner has seen some atrocities, atrocities he feels compelled to stand against. He also feels that he's been wrongly accused by the LAPD, and his claims that they ruined his reputation may be valid--but its backed him into a corner and triggered that fight or flight response, unleashing all the fear and trauma and injustice that he's endured in the army and on the police force. From his perspective, he's lashing out in self defense. From the polices perspective, he's targeting their families. But both sides are acting out of fear, as you can see from the audio recordings even the police department is acting emotionally. "Burn that motherfucker" is not what you hear a rational person saying.

If anyone wants to get anywhere on this matter, we need to return justice to the justice system and learn to treat angry people not as enemies, but as victims reacting in fear.

Ben Hinman wrote:

You have to remember that people can be the most sensible, rational human beings but reacting under fear can impair their judgement and their ability to express themselves. The fight or flight part of the brain is not something you can easily control, and in the mind of someone who's endured traumas and seen some messed up shit, there's even less control. I personally have suffered from PTSD, i know how frustrating it can be to have painful emotions but no memory to link it to. I think its perfectly reasonable to assume that Dorner has seen some atrocities, atrocities he feels compelled to stand against. He also feels that he's been wrongly accused by the LAPD, and his claims that they ruined his reputation may be valid--but its backed him into a corner and triggered that fight or flight response, unleashing all the fear and trauma and injustice that he's endured in the army and on the police force. From his perspective, he's lashing out in self defense. From the polices perspective, he's targeting their families. But both sides are acting out of fear, as you can see from the audio recordings even the police department is acting emotionally. "Burn that motherfucker" is not what you hear a rational person saying.

If anyone wants to get anywhere on this matter, we need to return justice to the justice system and learn to treat angry people not as enemies, but as victims reacting in fear.

well said.

Al Lock Photography wrote:

Are you one of those people who believes that only white people can be racist?

Al Lock Photography wrote:

Are you one of those people who believes that only white people can be racist?

No, not at all.  I believe people of all cultures are capable of being racist.