Posted on 05/28/2011 1:49:58 AM PDT by petitfour
Records released by the Pima County Sheriff's Department this week show that the four houses served with search warrants the morning of May 5 - when Jose Guerena was shot and killed by a SWAT team - are less than four miles apart and are all connected to the Guerena family.
And while initial reports were that doctors told the Guerena family that Jose had been shot 60 times, the Pima County medical examiner's preliminary report says he was shot 22 times. In its sole briefing on the incident, the Sheriff's Department said SWAT team members fired 71 rounds.
Aside from releasing more than 500 pages of documents about the incident, the department has remained mum since the May 10 briefing.
The raid netted drugs, large amounts of cash, bulletproof vests, about 30 cellphones and a stolen vehicle, records show, but no arrests have been made.
(Excerpt) Read more at azstarnet.com ...
A “bag of marijuana in the stove” is a sizable quantity? They don’t even say how big the bag was.
Well, done!
“You mean ‘the alleged’, right? Do you know the difference? Or do you simply think that since the cops shot him, he’s de facto a criminal?”
Sorry, we are not in court, so I’m not bound to use technically precise terms. Also, my statement was about “enough evidence for a judge to ok a warrant...”
“Was that before or after he opened fire on the police?”
It is not uncommon for people to interpret incorrectly when massive gunshots are heard in the fog of a dangerous situation. Do you honestly think that the police officers are out there to do harm and lie?
“I mean, rather than clear the building and apply medical attention to the target, they let the guy bleed out while waiting an hour for the robot to poke his dead body to make sure he’s dead”
Different set of of risk averseness in police versus military. Also, the officers state his body fell through a doorway and he was mostly obscured from their vision.
“My commander (prior to screaming at me to do my damn job) would have laughed himself to tears if I had asked for that in Tikrit.”
Seriously. Thanks for your service. I wonder how many of our strikes in Iraq and Afghan that are labeled as “civillians” are truly civies or just Talis and AQ in garb, hiding by some civies, knowing the PR effect.?
“Paying lip service to freedom and God given rights while cheering on the SWAT for acting like the Internal Security Bureau of some third world banana republic is intellectually dishonest.”
An objective look at our civil rights versus “third worlders” and even Euros, will show our civil rights are still intact and the strongest in the world.
Comparing the US to the Soviets is just not knowing the Soviets.
“I take it that you are for drug legalization?”
Gee...nothing gets by you....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_-dtU_esJ8
I agree with Buckley....do you argee with Rangel?
The war on drugs is a fruitless waste of time, resources and innocent life...
Now trot off and go read a couple years worth of my posts...
But I’ll save you the trouble...yes...I’m a rock ribbed conservative and yes I smoke pot.
A truth you most likely wont be able to handle....
I eagerly await the standard trollish accusations of being a DU’er etc...
Give it your best shot...others have tried and failed.
Looks like the PCSD and their mutual admiration society of like-minded SWAT styled LEO’s are kicking into overdrive on the publicity spin tour. Those local yokels give a whole new meaning to FUBAR.
“Tigersass said that mentioning people as promoting the agenda to legalize drugs is “character assassination”.
Do you have something you want to say to him?”
Yes I do...”Tiger...Belin_freeper is an Nanny Statist”
There...I said it...I feel much better now...
“there is no evidence that he pointed his AR at the LEOs”
LOL. You are correct and it is as irrelevant as hell.
The officers saw him pointing his AR at them. They deserve the benefit of the doubt in that situation as they are the only one’s there.
If you don’t give the officers the benefit of the doubt in a warranted and legal situation, then you are just being legalistic. My reply to that would be simple. Prove he didn’t point the gun at them.
I’m sure some of the deluded actually believe that officers are just shooting people up for the kicks of it.
*bows*
Logic...it’s my thing...
That's what I thought when you posted it as a fact.
If you don’t give the officers the benefit of the doubt in a warranted and legal situation, then you are just being legalistic.
Not at all. Unlike you I am able to extrapolate from the actual known facts (as opposed to the assumptions you make and call facts) that there was no need for a SWAT team at all and that they acted like untrained ninnies carrying out their SWAT raid.
In their eyes regardless of circumstances or outcome the use of these Swat teams justifies their existence and their line on the budget.
“Murdering the innocent is the highest sacrament in the Holy War on Drugs.”
Innocent my ass. Innocent people don’t point AR 15s at SWAT teams and verbally challenge them.
Drugs are illegal. Get over it.
This is much more involved than just drugs though, it will come out in the future.
That legalization will increase the size of government and the amount of obtrusion on the private citizen?
And of course you agree with Soros?
I don't accuse others of being DU'ers or trolls.
Great posts.
Do you agree with Hitler that tobacco is bad for you?
You have ABSOLUTELY NO proof that the dead man did any such thing!!! That's completely conjecture on your part.
I appreciate and thank you for your reasoned response, even in the face of my snark. I need to run an errand at the moment but will reply again later.
FReegards, SW
No.
The real scum are those attempting to justify murderous Tyranny, all in the name of contraband law and the absurd Drug War.
Under such auspices, virtually any killing by law enforcement can be rationalized, and usually is.
I have no idea what Hitler's posistion on the health effects of tobacco was. Are you trying to promote tobacco as healthy?
Let me get this straight, you've been posting ridiculous crap all throughout this thread on the assumption that evidence and facts unknown to you at this point will emerge in the future?
Do I have that right?
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.