This man was on the severe end of down syndrome and had the mind of a young child. He had an aide with him. He was killed over a movie ticket. This situation was not handled well by the theatre or police,
pro life ping
Or care giver
Yes, if cops are held accountable for killing Down Syndrome people, what about abortionists, who do it as a matter of course, and specifically for the reason someone has been found to have Down Syndrome?
There is no problem so bad that government can’t make it worse.
As cops themselves like to say, “You might beat the rap, but you won’t beat the ride.”
Frederick County grand jury declined to indict the deputies after their review of the case.
They belong in Prison nut just Bankrupted. But I would to use this as an opportunity to educate the masses on exactly how a Grand Jury operates.
In cases like this and many many others where “special” people are involved. The Prosecutor doesn’t really want to put these guys on trial so he goes to the Grand Jury and makes his case, but he doesn’t want in indictment and he desperately needs to hide some very incriminating evidence, so he puts on a Weak case with the real bad evidence presented and most everything else left out, but not enough in and of itself to sustain an indictment. Now All that evidence presented to the Grand Jury is SECRET FOREVER. The only Wild Card is if you get a few Smart people on the Grand Jury that decide to take matters in to their own hands, a rare event even though they are entitled to do so.
This is Standard Operating Procedure in Every Municipality across this country when it comes to prosecuting “Special” people.
Now think Mueller and his Federal Grand Jury.
Back in the day there was no problem sitting after the movie ended and watching it twice.
That practice went out of style WAY before this 26 year old was born. I wonder why he thought it was OK and didn't offer to buy a new ticket? Or, at least, why didn't his accompanying aide? That would have defused the situation pronto.
One of the cops should have reached into his pocket and paid for the movie ticket. Then he would have been considered a hero.
Civil suit doesn’t scratch the surface.
I can’t tell from the story why these a-holes haven’t been strung up, slowly choked to death just like the young man.
I feel rather uncomfortable sounding like BLM or some antifa goof, but it just doesn’t seem like “due process” when the consequence of non-compliance is an instant death sentence.
Amazing not once is it clearly indicated where this case originated. Closest clue “Frederick County”. It’s Frederick, MD.
So, MD ping.
‘In spite of Saylor’s death being ruled a homicide, an internal “investigation” cleared the three officers of any wrongdoing’
Whoa, whoa, writer. “Homicide” does NOT mean “murder”. It means the victim was killed due to another person. Could be murder, could be self-defense, could be accident. Otherwise, a few other general categories for death means are “suicide” and “accident”.
This is indeed tragic. I hate to say the manner in which they restrained him on the ground may have itself caused the injury. Basically they did not mean to kill him; it was incidental to their actions, and could’ve happened - or not - to anyone else. Any physical confrontation can result in something unexpected (also happened in Anne Arundel County around same time with some “student” at special-ed school delinquents - when the approved restraint of sitting on him caused his death). The question is if they were really justified in manhandling him in the time they did.
Why are they not under the jail yet? People like that should be thrown in solitary for the rest of their miserable lives.
Even if they had a right to arrest him, debatable, there is no question that they had no right to kill him by crushing his larynx. It is incredible that no criminal charges were made.
Crushing the man’s trachea is not “minimal force.”
I believe the reason he was dragged from his seat, manhandled to the ground and had his trachea crushed was because he said ‘f*** you’ to the first officer responding...
Officers who are found to be operating within the parameters of their jobs should not be liable for civil suits. The victim had an advocate in the local prosecutor, who was unable to obtain a criminal indictment, much less a conviction.
They obviously feel this was not “justice”, so they are trying to use the civil court to get “justice”, when a grand jury has already decided that “justice” should mean the officers are not punished.
Now, the officers were not working as city employees at the time, it seems, they were employed by the theater. That may make a difference, although suing the theater would be more appropriate, with the theater then being able to sue the employees if the theater thinks the employees did their job incorrectly.
On a broader note, why do we think that a “non-violent” person has an absolute right to maintain an illegal position without any physical altercation? If a person sits in the middle of the street, do you expect officers should not touch them if his mother is coming?
It is perfectly reasonable to pick someone up if they are engaged in civil disobedience, and sitting in a seat in a theater that you are not entitled to is that (unless this theater was being sold out for the movie, the theater was STUPID, and obviously should have let the kid watch again for free). The patrons who had tickets to the next showing were all being held hostage by this child’s actions.
It is of course a tragedy that a simple hold-down move turned deadly. Sometimes, actions that have no expectation of harm end up causing harm, and we don’t sue people everytime a perfectly normal and legal action ends up unexpectedly causing harm.
Police reaction was grossly inappropriate to the purported crime. Police do not have the authority to summarily execute anyone they feel is disobeying orders. Time was, even violent armed offenders were talked down and otherwise every attempt at nonlethal deescalation and capture was attempted. Now it’s a matter of seemingly minutes, obey or be blown away. I’m shocked that anyone even remotely conservative considers this appropriate, for anybody. I suggest that such individuals reconsider their self-classification. You’re not conservative, you’re authoritarian and you’re the reason why leftists think conservatives are Nazis.
More than just "wanting to watch a movie", I'm afraid. When your ticket is over and you won't leave, it's trespassing. Did he need killing? Of course not! Were the cops totally wrong? Maybe.
when I was in college I worked for (---) as essentially a groundskeeper. There was a time that a group of mentally handicapped individuals were brought through the park for a tour. One of them, a man with Down Syndrome, started by sitting down and defusing to move, and escalated to screaming, crying, writhely, stomping, -- just tantrum behavior in general. It was disconcerting and obviously somewhat threatening for other people around, as he was getting quite violent in terms of slamming himself and objects around -- I was afraid he would attack the attendant. His attendant saw me cleaning a ditch or something and asked ME to help get him into their van. I called security instead, of course I wasn't going to so much as lay a finger on the guy, and kept onlookers back ao much as I could, and multiple attendants were practically holding him down by the arms and legs, and since they were preoccupied with him, some of the other handicapped people were starting to wander further and further away. By the time the cops arrived, the man had calmed down on his own and went quietly back to the van. The whole incident lasted about half an hour.
If he had maintained that level of hysterics when the police arrived, I can't imagine how it would have ended without them having to forcibly remove him. It's easy for your heart to go out upon reading about a handicapped man dying just trying to watch a movie but having witnessed a such an incident first hand, I can see how, tragic as the result was, the actions of the cops could be justified.