Posted on 04/23/2011 3:02:32 PM PDT by DariusBane
When Mitchell Crooks checked out of the county jail last month and checked into a Las Vegas hospital, the 36-year-old videographer knew he had a fight on his hands.
His face was bloodied and bruised. His $3,500 camera had been impounded by police, and he faced criminal charges for battery on a police officer.
One month later, things have changed for Crooks.
The Clark County district attorney's More..office has dropped all charges, and Crooks has retained an attorney of his own. The Metropolitan Police Department has opened an internal investigation into the Las Vegas police officer, Derek Colling, who Crooks says falsely arrested and beat him for filming police.
And his camera -- which captured the entire March 20 altercation between Crooks and Colling -- has been returned.
The words are friendly enough, but the tone is tense:
"Can I help you, sir?" Colling asks from his patrol car after parking it in front of Crooks' driveway and shining the spotlight on Crooks.
"Nope. Just observing," Crooks responds, fixing his camera on the officer.
Crooks had for an hour been recording the scene across the street from his home in the 1700 block of Commanche Circle, near East Desert Inn Road and South Maryland Parkway, where officers had several young burglary suspects handcuffed and sitting on the curb.
As Las Vegas crimes go, the activity was fairly boring. Crooks wanted to use his new camera, and he figured his neighbors would like to see the suspects' faces.
When Colling loaded suspects into the back of his car and drove in a circle through the cul-de-sac, Crooks said he thought police were leaving. Then the officer stopped his car.
"Do you live here?" Colling asks.
"Nope," Crooks says.
Colling steps out of his patrol car.
Crooks said he now regrets not telling the officer that he was in fact standing in his own driveway. He realizes his response seemed cheeky, but he said the officer made him nervous. Colling walks toward Crooks, left hand raised.
"Turn that off for me," Colling orders.
"Why do I have to turn it off?'' Crooks responds. "I'm perfectly within my legal rights to be able to do this."
The officer repeats the command several times; each time Crooks reiterates his right to film.
"You don't live here," Colling says, now close to Crooks.
"I do live here!"
"You don't live here, dude."
"I just said I live here!"
As Crooks backs away, Colling grabs him by the shoulder and throws him down. On the ground, Crooks grabs the camera and turns it toward his face.
Colling's leg then enters the video frame. Crooks says he believes that was the kick that broke his nose.
The camera records the sound of Crooks screaming. He said that's when Colling was punching his face.
"Shut up!" Colling yells. "Stop resisting!"
YOU'RE IN A WORLD OF HURT,' OFFICER SAYS
In his arrest report Colling wrote that Crooks grabbed his shoulders "and attempted to take me to the ground. I in turn took him to the ground."
At Clark County Detention Center, Crooks was booked for battery on a police officer and obstruction of justice. He was released from jail the next day. On March 26, the Review-Journal reported on his case. Four days later all charges were dropped.
Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent said he dismissed the charges because the police report was vague.
"I asked for a more definite description of the battery because battery requires a violent touching," Laurent said. Police never provided that information.
Crooks said he always believed he'd be vindicated, but after police returned his camera he knew he had proof.
"I was confident I was doing the right thing, but I was excited they (the DA's office) weren't wasting any time, and that somebody was smart enough to know I was acting within the law," he said.
Crooks said the incident looks worse on tape than he remembered.
What bothered him the most, he said, was Colling's attitude after he was placed in handcuffs.
"Why did you do that? I live here," Crooks is heard pleading on the tape.
"You just told me you didn't live here," Colling says. "You live right here, in this house?"
Crooks asks for paramedics. Colling tells him to shut up and follow orders.
"If you fight again, dude Hey, if you (expletive) fight again, dude, you're in a world of hurt. You hear me?
"You're not in charge here, buddy. You hear me?"
Colling mocks Crooks' labored breathing.
"Oh yeah, buddy. Hey, when you don't do what I ask you to do, then you're in a world of hurt. Then you're in a world of hurt. Aren't ya? Huh?"
Crooks was later diagnosed with a deviated septum and a chest wall injury. Crooks believes his ribs were broken, but never got X-rays that could prove it.
ACLU LAWYERS SAY OFFICER WAS WRONG
Allen Lichtenstein, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney, reviewed Crooks' video and said Colling was clearly in the wrong. Officers are trained to avoid escalating situations, but Colling initiated the incident and created a physical confrontation without provocation, he said.
"It raises serious questions about whether the officer used good judgment and whether he was properly trained," Lichtenstein said. "Those questions require answers."
Police have no expectation of privacy, and it's perfectly legal to film officers as long as it does not interfere in their investigation, he said. Colling erred in claiming that Crooks was trespassing. By law, only a property owner or resident can make a trespassing complaint, Lichtenstein said.
"Even if the officer didn't think he lived there, that doesn't mean he didn't have permission to be there,'' Lichtenstein said. "In the video I heard, that question was never asked."
Crooks' attorney, David Otto, on Thursday sent police a statement from Crooks, along with a demand for $500,000 to cover Crooks' medial care, pain and suffering.
Colling had no legitimate reason to approach Crooks that night, Otto wrote.
"Officer Colling was aggravated that a citizen should have the audacity to video tape, him -- a Las Vegas Metropolitan Patrol Officer,'' Otto wrote. "Officer Colling decided to use the fear and terror of his physical ability to beat Mr. Crooks into submission -- to teach Mr. Crooks and, by example, all citizens and residents of the Las Vegas Valley."
Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie declined comment, saying the internal investigation remains open. Colling remains on duty, and Crooks has declined requests to be interviewed by detectives.
The suspects in Colling's patrol car may have witnessed the event and given statements to detectives, but their names have not been released. Police said they were not arrested or booked, so their names are not public record.
Crooks said he doesn't want to talk to detectives.
Darius is a liar-
The rest of the same article also goes into describing Crooks past and describes the circumstances of both shootings.
Liars play their game by withholding pertinent information thereby creating a false perception. See my post above which is on Crooks.
Here’s the article he’s probably quoting: http://www.lvrj.com/news/exclusive-police-beating-of-las-vegas-man-caught-on-tape-120509439.html
There is no point in discussing something like this with someone like Darius because he already has his mind made up, is simply looking for his cause (battle cry) and is willing to lie cheat and steal to make his point.
If you have shot two people in 5 1/2 years, you might have a problem. Yes, he was cleared, but what cop in LV doesn't get cleared?
Shooting two people in 5 1/2 years means what? It means what you want it to mean.
-It might mean he works a bad area of town.
-It could mean he was on a violent crimes task force.
Do you know?
But I’m sure that hasn’t crossed your mind yet. But in the meantime we’ve learned about how the self proclaimed victim with his camera and blog has done this before, lied to the cop, is now suing for $500,000 and has a lengthy criminal history.............. (lol) As I’ve said, the screamers get their side out first and loudest and the rest of the story usually follows in weeks or even months thereafter.
The media will latch onto the video (That gets viewers) because it is conflict or controversy that sells a story. The pundits and social activists will run with the issue and spin it whichever way, all based on half truths, incomplete information.......etc. They make it theirs and in some cases even turn things completely on its head. Later down the road we figure out what the real truth was and even then, you have to look for it, because it usually gets buried in all the background noise. Again, Google “Rodney King” or “OJ Simpson” and you have to dig through all the trash of conspiracy theories, racism and other garbage before you find something factual, chronological, non-biased, comprehensive, i.e. objective and truthful.
-It might mean he works a bad area of town.-It could mean he was on a violent crimes task force.
-It might mean that the city you are in easily clears shootings
-It might mean you are a punk with a badge
It could be any or all of the above.
Sure-
Those that fly off the handle with these sort of stories tell more about themselves than the story itself tells about an event.
There are many examples of events or issues that become these sort of rallying points around which the lemmings gather. These events become a battle cry for people that already have very strong feelings on an issue. Another example, Abu Gharib or Elian Gonzalez.......... Essentially, it’s this exact thinking why the Muslim community fly’s off the handle when they see doctored up pictures with a highly emotional article full of factual half truths of what the Jews/Israel did, when the blacks in the US immediately fly off the handle with the N.D. Lacrosse team. These people all already “know” something to be true and it’s just a matter of the right event sparking their short emotional and irrational fuse.
People give insight into their paradigm (so to speak- the world they wish it were and how they want to see things) and their inability to stay rational, objective and without emotion coming to what one would call “truth” by simply charging forward half baked on these issues. Like a bull seeing a the red cape, they charge into the issue and fill in all the voids and questions with assumptions and come to the outcome they wish it were. By doing this, they inevitably make an ass of themselves (not always, but most of the time).
Another such innocent victim of ruthless police brutality: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/669597-peyton-hillis-notre-dame-boston-marathon-and-mondays-late-sports-buzz/entry/65589-crystal-mangum-duke-lacrosse-rape-accuser-may-face-murder-charges
There are many examples of events or issues that become these sort of rallying points around which the lemmings gather. These events become a battle cry for people that already have very strong feelings on an issue.
Well, thank the heavens that you've been able to keep a completely open mind.
There are many issues where people come to quick conclusions based on their personal perceptions and bias, and yes, I didn’t draw these in this case. I was attempting to point out all the *unknowns* on day one and was attacked for doing so (Go back and check). Asking questions obviously bothered some of the “critical thinkers” here. Last I checked, the underlying purpose of this forum is to be the media’s critic. So I withdrew and simply let time fill in the voids which it tends to do. There are many “open minded” folk that knew it all the second the story broke.
“Darius is a liar-
The rest of the same article also goes into describing Crooks past and describes the circumstances of both shootings.
Liars play their game by withholding pertinent information thereby creating a false perception. See my post above which is on Crooks.
Here’s the article he’s probably quoting: http://www.lvrj.com/news/exclusive-police-beating-of-las-vegas-man-caught-on-tape-120509439.html
There is no point in discussing something like this with someone like Darius because he already has his mind made up, is simply looking for his cause (battle cry) and is willing to lie cheat and steal to make his point.”
1st of I didn't write the article. Secondly I don't give a fig for the background of Crookes or what other issues he has had with LE. The fact that he said he lives there or does not live makes no difference at all. The cop was wrong and you are wrong. You also called me a liar but did not have the courage to ping me. So you are a cowardly POS who gets no respect from me.
“It might be better to bide your time and take care of this unfinished business later.”
That is exactly what I was thinking... Something like this need to be handled “off the books”...
I don't know what I don't know, but I do know enough that most of these stories are full of hyperbole, people automatically default towards a position based on their contrived ideas. You only see some of the facts (much more is usually presented when there is a trial) and video is but part of it. More often than not, you are proven wrong in the long run may that be Rodney King, the Duke Lacrosse team, the Philadelphia police beating someone.........
No, if he lives there does matter.
Yes, someones past does indicate ones credibility or if one is a consistent/persistent shit head looking for trouble, trying to squeeze out a dime or make his 15 minutes of fame by pulling some stunt.
Yes, you are a liar because you omit information from articles you probably quoted. Omission of pertinent information to intentionally mislead or deceive is a form of lying. Sorry that makes you “feel” bad about yourself, I know in our society it's all about making people “feel” good about themselves.
No, I didn't omit you intentionally, I just don't care because discussing things with someone that has no intent of seeking the truth is a waste of time, and I don't know how to send a post to multiple people at once.
No, I'm not a coward, I earned my CIB on three occasions, I have two combat tours as an infantryman, one which was 17 months in Iraq which made be a 90% disabled VET.
This is my last post to you, as I stated, I don't waste my time with people who have no intent on being truthful and simply want to twist something so it fits their contrived idea of how they want to see things. You might as well be one of those that jump on the Jesse Jackson bandwagon.
Do this- wait and see how it turns out, then ask yourself why it didn't turn out the way you thought (as is most often the case)? Obviously this will then be a conspiracy..... lol
I quit reading at “articles you probably quoted”.
Your assumptions are what they are. You are calling me a liar based on things “you probably quoted”.
Mindless, silly, vapid. Good day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.