Denver Cops Arrest Man who Exposed them Beating Man on Video While Promoting Cop who did the Beating
By Carlos Miller | PINAC | December 14, 2014
A man who video recorded Denver police repeatedly punching a man in the face, causing his head to bounce off the pavement, before tripping his pregnant wife and causing her to fall on her face – sparking an FBI investigation into the department – was arrested Thursday in what appears to be a case of retaliation.
After all, Denver police not only arrested him on what they called a “newly activated traffic warrant” from a nearby county after he had just left the FBI office with whom he is cooperating on the federal investigation, they refused to allow him to bond out of jail, even though the warrant was regarding a measly missed court date over failure to provide proof of insurance and registration during a traffic stop a few months ago.
Denver police are obviously upset that upset Levi Frasier managed to recover the footage from his Samsung tablet after they had deleted it, which led to them being investigated by the feds.
Not that it stopped them from promoting the cop, Charles “Chris” Jones IV, seen on video punching the suspect to sergeant earlier this month.
Denver police officer Charles “Chris” Jones IV was recently promoted to sergeant despite being under a federal investigation for beating a man on camera.
According to FOX 31:
Frasier was reportedly arrested after leaving the FBI office and before he arrived at FOX31 Denver studios for a schedule interview.
Frasier was not allowed to bond out and was spending the night in jail.
We emailed DPD for a comment and other clarifications after hours.
Cmdr. Matt Murray replied, “I would check with the jail. They could provide the most accurate information about why Mr. Frasier is in jail.”
Frasier is a key witness in an ongoing DPD internal affairs investigation. After recording an arrest on his electronic device, Frasier accused officers of seizing his Samsung tablet without a warrant and scrolling through his video files without permission.
Frasier reported that when the tablet was given back to him, the video was missing, but he restored it with a cloud application.
FOX 31 has been doing a great job on keeping up with this story, dedicating more than six minutes in the previous segment, which you can see below along with the latest segment on his arrest.
They also published a piece that cops have no legal right to seize phones and delete footage, something the mainstream media has always had trouble addressing:
In an exclusive interview with FOX31 Denver, Frasier said, “I didn’t give it to them at all. I went back to the van and grabbed it and as I was walking up — it was taken out of my hand.”
Frasier claimed Denver officers violated his civil rights and federal law when they searched his personal photos file without a court order.
Legal experts said Frasier has a right to be angry. Police cannot, except in rare circumstances, seize your mobile devices without a search warrant.
A June Supreme Court ruling, Riley v. California, greatly limits under what circumstances police can look into a persons cellphone or tablet digging for evidence.
“They crossed the line – absolutely!” said Flores’ attorney Benjamin Hartford.
The incident has prompted the Denver Police Department to turn on the Police PR Spin Machine by issuing a four-page release justifying the behavior of the cops in punching the suspect and tripping his wife, but also putting Frasier’s character into question because he has served time in prison years earlier.
But that letter led to the Citizen Oversight Board, whose seven members are appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the city council, to issue its own letter, criticizing the four-page press release, accusing them of lacking objectivity, an excerpt which you can read below, or read in its entirety by clicking here.
The press release also made statements to attack the credibility of the witness who came forward with the video. It stated that the witness has a criminal record, and listed several crimes that he was allegedly imprisoned for in another state. It stated that he was recently released after a “lengthy” prison sentence, and that the witness has “six aliases,” which occurs as a result of a legal name change or “the illegal use of someone else’s name or lying about one’s identity to the police.”
We strongly believe that it was not appropriate for the DPD to make these statements. There is already significant community concern and distrust of the DPD and IAB. Instead of thanking the witness who came forward to share information, the DPD publicly attacked his character. It is very likely that the DPD’s attacks on this witness will only reinforce fears in the community, and inhibit other members of the public from cooperating with DPD or IAB if they witness possible officer misconduct in the future.
We are aware that the stated purpose of IAB investigations is to fairly determine the facts so that decisions can be made about whether any officers engaged in misconduct. There should be no predetermined conclusions at the beginning of an IAB investigation. In this case, however, the DPD has publicly stated that the force was appropriate before IAB has even conducted its investigation. In the news story, the DPD Commander admitted that the Department had not yet viewed the witness’ full video of the use of force. Isn’t that a very important piece of evidence that would have to be viewed before deciding that repeatedly punching the man and tripping his pregnant girlfriend was appropriate?
Fake mobile towers in central Oslo may snoop on politicians, report reveals
RT | December 14, 2014
A network of fake base mobile stations that can snoop on leading politicians’ mobile phones, as well as ordinary people, has been discovered in central Oslo, some outside Norway’s parliament and the prime minister’s residence, according to a report.
Investigative journalists from the Aftenposten newspaper have detected a number of places in the capital with suspicious mobile activity. They teamed up with two security companies to help track down fake base stations, which confirmed that spy equipment has been used in downtown Oslo.
According to the newspaper, false base stations, known as IMSI catchers, have been most probably used to monitor the movements of high-ranking officials, specifying who enters parliament, government offices and other buildings in the area. It could also be used to snoop on phone calls of selected people in the area.
An IMSI catcher (International Mobile Subscriber Identity) is a telephony eavesdropping device for monitoring mobile phone traffic and movement of mobile phone users. IMSI catchers are used in a number of countries, including the US, by law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
Under Norwegian law, only the National Security Agency (NSM) and police are authorized to use eavesdropping equipment.
The Security service (PST) has launched an investigation in central Oslo, following the Aftenposten report, to find out who installed the surveillance equipment.
The Local has quoted security operatives as saying that a number of organizations could be responsible for the false base stations.
“It could be private actors or state actors,” the PST’s Arne Christian Haugstøyl said.
“I can’t on the basis of these discoveries say that it is a foreign intelligence agency, but I can say that we know that foreign intelligence agencies have this kind of capacity. And in our preventive work we advise those looking after Norwegian interests not to talk about sensitive issues on mobile phones,” he noted.
The Game Is Rigged: Why Americans Keep Losing to the Police State
“The truth is that the State is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit, but above all to corrupt its citizens.”—Leo Tolstoy
By JOHN W. WHITEHEAD | RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE | December 13, 2014
My 7-year-old granddaughter has suddenly developed a keen interest in card games: Go Fish, Crazy Eights, Old Maid, Blackjack, and War. We’ve fallen into a set pattern now: every time we play, she deals the cards, and I pretend not to see her stacking the deck in her favor. And of course, I always lose.
I don’t mind losing to my granddaughter at Old Maid, knowing full well the game is rigged. For now, it’s fun and games, and she’s winning. Where the rub comes in is in knowing that someday she’ll be old enough to realize that being a citizen in the American police state is much like playing against a stacked deck: you’re always going to lose.
The game is rigged, and “we the people” keep getting dealt the same losing hand. Even so, we stay in the game, against all odds, trusting that our luck will change.
The problem, of course, is that luck will not save us. The people dealing the cards—the politicians, the corporations, the judges, the prosecutors, the police, the bureaucrats, the military, the media, etc.—have only one prevailing concern, and that is to maintain their power and control over the country and us.
It really doesn’t matter what you call them—the 1%, the elite, the controllers, the masterminds, the shadow government, the police state, the surveillance state, the military industrial complex—so long as you understand that while they are dealing the cards, the deck will always be stacked in their favor.
Incredibly, no matter how many times we see this played out, Americans continue to naively buy into the idea that it’s our politics that divide us as a nation. As if there were really a difference between the Democrats and Republicans. As if the policies of George W. Bush were any different from those of Barack Obama. As if we weren’t a nation of sheep being fattened for the kill by a ravenous government of wolves.
We’re in trouble, folks, and changing the dealer won’t save us: it’s time to get out of the game.
We have relinquished control of our government to overlords who care nothing for our rights, our dignity or our humanity, and now we’re saddled with an authoritarian regime that is deaf to our cries, dumb to our troubles, blind to our needs, and accountable to no one.
Even revelations of wrongdoing amount to little in the way of changes for the better.
For instance, after six years of investigation, 6,000 written pages and $40 million to write a report that will not be released to the public in its entirety, the U.S. Senate has finally concluded that the CIA lied about its torture tactics, failed to acquire any life-saving intelligence, and was more brutal and extensive than previously admitted. This is no revelation. It’s a costly sleight of hand intended to distract us from the fact that nothing has changed. We’re still a military empire waging endless wars against shadowy enemies, all the while fattening the wallets of the defense contractors for whom war is money.
Same goes for the government’s surveillance programs. More than a year after Edward Snowden’s revelations dominated news headlines, the government’s domestic surveillance programs are just as invasive as ever. In fact, while the nation was distracted by the hubbub over the long-awaited release of the Senate’s CIA torture, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court quietly reauthorized the National Security Agency’s surveillance of phone records. This was in response to the Obama administration’s request to keep the program alive.
Police misconduct and brutality have been dominating the news headlines for months now, but don’t expect any change for the better. In fact, with Obama’s blessing, police departments continue to make themselves battle ready with weapons and gear created for the military. Police shootings of unarmed citizens continue with alarming regularity. And grand juries, little more than puppets controlled by state prosecutors, continue to legitimize the police state by absolving police of any wrongdoing.
These grand juries embody everything that’s wrong with America today. In an age of secret meetings, secret surveillance, secret laws, secret tribunals and secret courts, the grand jury—which meets secretly, hears secret testimony, and is exposed to only what a prosecutor deems appropriate—has become yet another bureaucratic appendage to a government utterly lacking in transparency, accountability and adherence to the rule of law.
It’s a sorry lesson in how a well-intentioned law or program can be perverted, corrupted and used to advance illegitimate purposes. The war on terror, the war on drugs, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school zero tolerance policies, eminent domain, private prisons: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns. However, once you add money and power into the mix, even the most benevolent plans can be put to malevolent purposes.
In this way, the war on terror has become a convenient ruse to justify surveillance of all Americans, to create a suspect society, to expand the military empire, and to allow the president to expand the powers of the Executive Branch to imperial heights.
Under cover of the war on drugs, the nation’s police forces have been transformed into extensions of the military, with SWAT team raids carried out on unsuspecting homeowners for the slightest charge, and police officers given carte blanche authority to shoot first and ask questions later.
Asset forfeiture schemes, engineered as a way to strip organized crime syndicates of their ill-gotten wealth, have, in the hands of law enforcement agencies, become corrupt systems aimed at fleecing the citizenry while padding the pockets of the police.
Eminent domain, intended by the founders as a means to build roads and hospitals for the benefit of the general public, has become a handy loophole by which local governments can evict homeowners to make way for costly developments and shopping centers.
Private prisons, touted as an economically savvy solution to cash-strapped states with overcrowded prisons have turned into profit- and quota-driven detention centers that jail Americans guilty of little more than living off the grid, growing vegetable gardens in the front yards, or holding Bible studies in their back yards.
Traffic safety schemes such as automated red light and speed cameras, ostensibly aimed at making the nation’s roads safer, have been shown to be thinly disguised road taxes, levying hefty fines on drivers, most of whom would never have been pulled over, let alone ticketed, by an actual police officer.
School zero tolerance policies, a response to a handful of school shootings, have become exercises in folly, turning the schools into quasi-prisons, complete with armed police, metal detectors and lockdowns. The horror stories abound of 4- and 6-year-olds being handcuffed, shackled and dragged, kicking and screaming, to police headquarters for daring to act like children while at school.
As for grand juries, which were intended to serve as a check on the powers of the police and prosecutors, they have gone from being the citizen’s shield against injustice to a weapon in the hands of government agents. A far cry from a people’s court, today’s grand jury system is so blatantly rigged in favor of the government as to be laughable. Unless, that is, you happen to be one of the growing numbers of Americans betrayed and/or victimized by their own government, in which case, you’ll find nothing amusing about the way in which grand juries are used to terrorize the populace all the while covering up police misconduct.
Unfortunately, as I make clear in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, we’re long past the point of simple fixes. The system has grown too large, too corrupt, and too unaccountable. If there’s to be any hope for tomorrow, it has to start at the local level, where Americans still have a chance to make their voices heard. Stop buying into the schemes of the elite, stop being distracted by their sleight-of-hands, stop being manipulated into believing that an election will change anything, and stop playing a rigged game where you’ll always be the loser.
It’s time to change the rules of the game. For that matter, it’s time to change the game.
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead [send him mail] is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He is the author of A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State and The Change Manifesto (Sourcebooks).
Copyright © 2014 The Rutherford Institute
The Canadian torture state
By J. Baglow | Rabble | December 12, 2014
Whipping with cables. Prolonged solitary confinement. Other unspeakable acts, committed against citizens with official blessing. Use of “information” gathered by torture considered legitimate.
No, no, I don’t mean the Torture Report. I’m talking about Canada.
Let the other sordid drama play itself out in America. We’ve now learned more about “rectal feeding” (read: medically unjustified anal rape) than we ever wanted to know, and that’s just for starters. Did the authorities raid every prison for the criminally insane to swell CIA ranks? Far worse, we’re watching a desperate attempt to frame this whole series of vile acts as a period in (recent) history now thankfully ended. Don’t you go believing that fairytale, now.
Torture and other state-sanctioned violence against civilians continues. Gitmo persists, despite Obama’s promises. His drones are still killing and maiming civilians in far-off lands. American citizens can now be extra-judicially executed by Presidential decree. Due process, Obama’s Attorney General explains, doesn’t necessarily mean judicial process — just a convo in the Oval Office will satisfy Constitutional requirements. Recall also that Obama gave immunity to the creatures who enabled and committed state torture under his predecessor. They aren’t hurting any. The monstrous John Yoo, for one, who advocated for the legality of crushing the testicles of children, is now a well-paid professor in California. Dick Cheney is still making a fortune on the speaking circuit.
Well, as I said, let the U.S. be the U.S., that godawful prison-house, continuing on its downward spiral. But no one should imagine for one moment that it is alone in using torture as a routine implement of policy.
While the current Canadian government — particularly its former Paraguayan wing — is known for its open support of torture as a supposed information-gathering tool, the rot really set in under the previous Liberal administrations of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin. Just ask a victim of “extraordinary rendition” like Maher Arar. Talk to others tortured and imprisoned thanks to the collegial complicity of CSIS with the secret police in Syria, Egypt and Sudan — Canadian citizens Muayyed Nureddin, Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad Abou El-Maati, and Abousfian Abdelrazik.
Or ask (if any remain alive) the Afghan detainees turned over by Canadian Forces to Afghan government torturers. Stephen Harper was willing to risk all the marbles there, and he successfully maintained his cover-up after all was said and done. CSIS was up to its neck in that one, too. Most of the documents will likely never be made public, despite an historic ruling by the then-Speaker of the House of Commons, Peter Milliken.
Then there is child soldier Omar Khadr, tortured (once again with CSIS complicity, this time after the fact) in Guantanamo. His only way out of that hellhole was to cop a plea. He’s sitting in a Canadian jail at the moment, while the Harper government continues to make his life miserable.
Is this torture thing just about national security? Not at all. Take the use of solitary confinement within Canada’s prison system. Prolonged solitary confinement is well-recognized as a form of torture. But Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney has now confirmed that it will continue to be imposed on mentally ill inmates, rejecting out of hand the key recommendation from the coroner’s inquest into the death of Ashley Smith.
Let us not be too smug, then, about the horrific revelations south of the border. Because, to put it bluntly, we torture too — and under Stephen Harper, torture has been officially and publicly sanctioned. Compliments of the season, everyone.
Citizen Run Database Shows Over 1,000 People Killed by Cops in 2014
By Jay Syrmopoulos | The Free Thought Project | December 10, 2014
To date the most reliable data anyone has about law enforcement killings in the U.S. was the FBI’s statistics on homicides by law enforcement. But therein lies the problem.
Those numbers are voluntarily given to the FBI by police, and many jurisdictions simply don’t hand over this information, thus making an accurate accounting of exactly how many people police have actually killed each year extremely difficult to ascertain.
For instance, the killing of Eric Garner would not be included in the FBI’s 2014 statistics because New York doesn’t participate in the voluntary program.
Thankfully there is a new means of aggregating how many people are being killed by law enforcement. This new tool for accountability is the website www.killedbypolice.com.
It’s basically a spreadsheet that lists every person killed by cops in the years 2013 and 2014. In addition to naming those killed, it also provides a link to media reports for each of the killings, age, sex and race if available.
The information available on the site begins in May of 2013 and runs through now. The novel idea of monitoring the number of police killings through news reports has shown to be a much better accounting of deaths at the hands of cops than the voluntary FBI system.
The FBI’s stats show that in all of 2013 there were 461 people killed by cops, but when using the new site, which only shows from May 1 to Dec. 31, 2013, police actually killed 748 people. Keep in mind, 748 is drastically more than the feds claim police killed the entire year but only accounts for 8 months of 2013.
The site shows 2014’s total number killed by police to be at 1,029 with a few weeks left in the year.
Here is a link to their Facebook page. This is another wonderful tool to be utilized in holding law enforcement accountable for their actions, as they can no longer hide these numbers from the public.
This site has shown itself to be a dramatically better barometer for what is actually transpiring in police state USA, and accounting for how many citizens are actually being killed by police, than anything we previously had available.
Jay Syrmopoulos is an investigative journalist, freethinker, researcher, and ardent opponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs. Jay’s work has previously been published on BenSwann.com and WeAreChange.org. You can follow him on Twitter @sirmetropolis, on Facebook at Sir Metropolis and now on tsu.
Justice for Eric Garner? From the Justice Department? Don’t Hold Your Breath
By Mark P. Fancher | Black Agenda Report | December 10, 2014
When news broke of the grand jury’s refusal to indict Eric Garner’s killer, Spike Lee told CNN interviewers that because the death was video recorded he remains hopeful that the U.S. Department of Justice investigation will produce the results thousands of protesters crave. Based on the Justice Department’s record, it is probably a vain hope.
The Garner killing is not the first one to be captured by cameras. The Justice Department had access to a video record of the police firing squad execution of Milton Hall in Saginaw, Michigan, but no charges were brought against the cops who shot 46 bullets at the 49-year-old homeless black man. The reason? In a statement, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division said: “…this tragic event does not present sufficient evidence of willful misconduct to give rise to a federal criminal prosecution of the police officers involved.”
Few who watch the police cruiser dashboard camera footage of the killing reach the same conclusion. That video is probably the best indication that if the Justice Department believes the evidence against Milton Hall’s killers is insufficient, then the bar is so high that there is no case that is likely to qualify for prosecution – including Eric Garner’s killing. While it is possible that public pressure might force Eric Holder to handle the Garner case differently, some legal analysts discount that possibility because they have bought into the Justice Department’s inaccurate and incomplete interpretation of the applicable federal law.
The law that authorizes federal criminal civil rights charges against police officers says that in a homicide case like Eric Garner’s or Milton Hall’s, a police officer can be guilty only if he not only violated the victim’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force, but the officer also “willfully” violated that right. In its explanation of why Milton Hall’s killers were not prosecuted, the Justice Department said: “Law enforcement actions based on fear, panic, misperception or even poor judgment do not constitute willful conduct prosecutable under the statute.” Implied in that statement is the belief that it would not be possible to get into the heads of the officers and extract private thoughts that might betray their intent to “willfully” violate a constitutional right.
To the great disappointment of those outraged by Milton Hall’s death, the Justice Department conveniently ignored what the courts have had to say about the “willfulness” requirement. Starting with the U.S. Supreme Court and ending with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (which has jurisdiction over Milton Hall’s hometown) the courts have made it clear that the Justice Department is not required to engage in mind reading in order to hold the police accountable.
The Supreme Court said: “[t]he fact that the defendants may not have been thinking in constitutional terms is not material” to whether they satisfy the willfulness requirement. The Sixth Circuit explained that a jury: “need not, in order to convict, determine that [the accused] actually knew that it was a Constitutional right that they were violating…”
Not only is it unnecessary to prove that an officer was thinking specifically of trying to violate a victim’s Fourth Amendment rights, but the Supreme Court took the additional step of providing a much easier way to charge and convict police who kill. The court said: “[to] act willfully in the sense in which we use the word [is to] act in open defiance or reckless disregard of a constitutional requirement…”
It is therefore hard to imagine why charges cannot be brought when police officers fire dozens of bullets at a homeless man armed only with a pen knife; or when police use a choke hold to put a submissive man on the ground because he was alleged to be engaged in unauthorized cigarette sales. By almost anyone’s reckoning, such conduct should be regarded as “open defiance” or “reckless disregard” for the constitutional rights of the victims.
Will the Justice Department’s investigation result in the criminal prosecution of Eric Garner’s killers? It’s possible, but don’t hold your breath. With each new incident of unpunished police violence, it becomes more likely that concerned observers will conclude that African people born or living in America have no rights that the Justice Department is bound to respect.
Mark P. Fancher is the staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan Racial Justice Project, which pursues justice for Milton Hall. He is also a member of the National Conference of Black Lawyers. He can be contacted at mfancher@comcast.net.
Another Witness in Michael Brown Shooting Found Dead
teleSUR | December 8, 2014
Another witness of the shooting of Michael Brown has been found dead in a dry channel near River Des Peres in Misssouri, local authorities confirmed.
The man has been identified as 23-year-old Shawn Gray, a black man who testified during the grand jury proceedings over the killing of Brown by former police officer Darren Wilson.
According to relatives and friends, Gray was last seen leaving a restaurant on Thanksgiving Day. The manner and cause of his death are pending autopsy results. However, his family is demanding answers and say the death could have been premeditated murder.
Another witness DeAndre Joshua, also a young black man, was found shot dead and his car was torched outside the same neighborhood where Brown was killed.
Two witnesses of the Brown shooting have now been found dead under suspicious circumstances, while local authorities have not announced any leads in either case, and the press has provided minimal coverage.
The police murders of black young men in recent months has provided a stark reminder to the world of the harsh reality faced by many black communities in the United States. Their deaths exposed the continued persecution of black people.
Mass protests against these injustices have taken place across the country. Protesters are demanding justice for black lives lost at the hands of state sanctioned violence, with over 100 days of peaceful protest ranging from #HandsUpWalkOut and solidarity days with Ferguson.
See a collection of teleSUR analysis, video, and news pieces on the issue of, and resistance to police racism in the United States.
Man Killed by LAPD said to be Street Performer with Plastic Prop Knife; Cops Accused of Planting Real Knife
By Carlos Miller | PINAC | December 7, 2014
Los Angeles police gunned down a man at a busy Hollywood intersection Friday night, claiming he had been trying to attack them with a knife, causing them to fear for their lives, which is why they fired several rounds, leaving his body laying on a corner as shocked witnesses looked on.
But some locals are saying the man was merely a street performer known as “J” who would pose with tourists holding a prop knife made of plastic.
The area of Hollywood Blvd where he was killed is near the famous Walk of Fame and is renowned for its street performers who dress up in costumes and play roles to the amusement of tourists. Many of the performers dress up as characters from Hollywood movies, who pose with tourists for photos in exchange for tips.
The man shot was said to be impersonating the character from Scream, a 1996 horror movie, about a masked man with a knife who murders teenagers with a knife as pictured below.
LAPD is not releasing any information on the shooting, except for tweeting a picture of a folding knife laying near the body, perhaps a Swiss Army Knife, carried by boy scouts everywhere.
But some skeptics are saying the knife was planted because it is not clearly visible in the video recorded in the immediate aftermath of the shooting and posted to Facebook.

I’ve watched the video several times and cannot make out a knife, but I cannot say with certainty it is not there.
However, the first several minutes of the video, which is posted below, show police clamoring all over the area where the knife was eventually photographed.
And at 4:44, a man dressed in blue wearing gloves bends down and appears to lay something on the ground.
Jordan White, the man who recorded the video, said the man was unarmed.
So this could potentially be a huge scandal for the scandal-ridden LAPD.
What do you think? Do you see a knife in the first few minutes of the video? If you are a witness or know the man killed, please message me here.
Stingray Warrentless Wiretap by Chicago Police on Activists
The Chicago Police were listening to an activist’s phone call(s) to learn about their “movements” in the city.
Thug life in Edmonton
By J. Baglow | Rabble | December 5, 2014
Officer Darren Wilson of Ferguson, MO, has reportedly made his first million by gunning down an unarmed Black kid. In Edmonton, AB, Constable Mike Wasylyshen has just become a Sergeant.
Who is Mike Wasylyshen?
He’s the son of a former Edmonton police chief. He’s also a convicted criminal with a history of violence.
In 2002, he Tasered an unconscious Aboriginal youth eight times. It took ten years for the young man’s family even to get a disciplinary hearing for what a judge called “cruel and unusual punishment.” Wasylyshen was docked 120 hours of pay.
Then, in 2005, he beat up a man on crutches, seemingly just for the hell of it. It took eighteen months before the Edmonton police bothered to lay charges. He eventually received a whopping $500 fine for that one, but at least earned himself a criminal record.
Between times, in 2003, Wasylyshen was dressed down by a provincial court judge for lying to obtain a search warrant. Evidence in a drug case had to be tossed out due to Mike’s “carelessness bordering on indifference.” There was another one of those “internal investigation” thingies. No discipline.
The man is not without chutzpah. Before he was disciplined for the Tasering incident, he sued the CBC for “defamation” for reporting on it.
Now this sterling model of professional policing has received a promotion.
Hey, says the Edmonton Police Service. That was then. This is now.
Does crime pay after all? You decide.
“Why Did Police Kill Our Son?”
By Carl Finamore | CounterPunch | December 5, 2014
The parents of 28-year old Alex Nieto are tired of police refusing to release information explaining why their son was killed by San Francisco police on March 21, 2014. “The police have been stonewalling us by withholding basic information. It can only be considered a cover up,” family attorney Adante Pointer told me.
It’s true. The police have not released a witness list, not released a pertinent 911 call, not released the police reports and not released the names of officers involved.
This makes an independent investigation impossible. As a result, Pointer filed a federal wrongful death civil lawsuit in August that would require police to stop withholding pertinent information.
“Alex’s community deserves to know who killed him. Officers are public servants, not a secret force in a neighborhood,” community activist Adriana Camarena emphasized to me.
Nobody is interested in where they live or other private personal information “but we do want to know their record of interaction with the community and their role in the homicide of Alex Nieto.”
Police accountability begins with transparency, she added.
Naming the officers involved is truly extremely relevant. For example, the named chokehold murderer of Eric Garner had two recent civil rights lawsuits filed against him – according to a CNN legal analyst, one was settled by the city for $30,000 in 2013 and the other is still pending.
Fortunately, a Dec. 3 “Justice for Alex” community picket line at San Francisco’s Federal Courthouse received their first good news when a judge agreed with the family by denying a request from the City for an unusually restrictive protective order that would further conceal from the public the names of all officers at the homicide scene.
Attorney Pointer expects the police to resort to delaying legal procedures but the family will not stop, he says, until the relevant information is made public.
Case Facts
Nieto was surrounded by a small army of police officers and met with a hail of bullets while walking down a hill after treating himself to an early evening sunset dinner while leisurely sitting on a neighborhood park bench.
Supporters insist there is absolutely no evidence Alex posed any threat. He was dressed for his security guard shift and just about to leave for his job when his body was riddled by 15 bullet wounds in two separate volleys.
Police Chief Greg Suhr explained at a Town Hall meeting in late March that Alex was first shot down to the ground but still alive. Only then did officers release the fatal second volley of shots.
The Medical Examiner’s autopsy report also states that eleven out of the fifteen bullet wounds are downward trajectory shots.
Supporter’s believe, therefore, that the four upward trajectory wounds were the first to be delivered by officer’s facing uphill where Alex was located, whereas the second round of shots are all fired in a downward trajectory when Alex would have been on the ground, wounded and defenseless.
Clearly, the family deserves an explanation.
Does Alex Fit the Police Profile of an Aggressor?
Nieto was a well-regarded Latino community organizer who very publicly urged peaceful resolution of conflicts to troubled neighborhood youth consistent with his Buddhist beliefs and practices.
“Alex was humble and peaceful and wanted to be one with everyone. He sure helped me when I was going through my teenage troublemaking episodes,” his good friend and fellow Buddhist Ely Flores recalled.
Given Alex’s character, police claims that he was the aggressor has shocked the Latino community who “are also up in arms over police mistreatment of the family,” as attorney Pointer describes.
For example, Alex’s parents were not informed of his death until the next day and only after being interrogated by police who also wanted to search their home without a warrant. The parents refused to allow the search but were peppered by numerous personal questions about Alex until they were rather summarily informed at the last moment that their son was dead.
Ignoring the family once again, police officers on the following day used the keys taken from Alex’s body to drive away with his car, without notifying the family and without a warrant. They stripped searched the vehicle and took Alex’s iPad, returning the damaged property only after community uproar at the Town Hall meeting in March.
Such callous disregard for the family has not gone down well and, along with the stonewalling of vital information, explains widespread community suspicions.
Class, Race & Excessive Force
There is an alternative to the police scenario painting Nieto as the aggressor. It is a storyline where, once again, the toxic triad of race, class and excessive force seems to have colluded.
For example, Alex’s Bernal Heights’ neighborhood is changing rapidly and considerably. Redfin, a national real estate brokerage firm, just voted it the number one sought-after neighborhood in the entire country.
Formerly part of the working-class Latino district of San Francisco, millionaires are rapidly buying up properties.
Did a young, large, working class Latino man eating his dinner on the hills of Bernal Heights, with one of the most “sought-after” city views in the nation, stand out as a troubling figure for the so-far anonymous 911 caller?
This is not so far-fetched.
Episcopal priest, Father Richard Smith, Ph.D., serves the neighborhood Latino community and has seen these forces at work. What I am seeing is eerily similar to what I saw during my recent visit to Ferguson, he told me.
And, he added, just as with Michael Brown, San Francisco police released misleading information on Alex’s character even as they refused to disclose information on the officers involved.
But there are also some factors distinct to San Francisco where “displacement and gentrification is a big deal,” he said. “For example, I have seen police ramp up their presence and hassle and shoo away impoverished residents from public spaces that are currently being considered for big condominium developments.”
Bernal Heights is at the center of these changes. It is ground zero for displacement and gentrification. Perhaps traditional Latino residents of Bernal Heights like Alex now stand out as suspicious troublemakers to be shooed away.
Police Version Doesn’t Add Up
Did the police also rush to judgment when they came upon Alex who was dressed for work as a security guard with his holstered and licensed Taser? Why didn’t the police see the Taser’s distinctive black and yellow coloring?
Police dispatch informed officers to look for a man with a holstered weapon “at his hip” who is “eating sunflower seeds or chips.” The Taser is never described as drawn, nor Alex as threatening.
Police claim they never saw the Taser’s labeled coloring. Well, the bright coloring on the Taser would certainly have been more difficult for the police to see from their reported 75 feet distance, if the Taser was indeed holstered.
This is precisely the witness testimony in the family lawsuit – Alex at no time posed a threat according to this witness. He at no time took the Taser from his holster, at no time pointed it at police and at no time made any move to grab it.
Of course, pointing a Taser at dozens of police aiming guns at you would have not only been truly irrational but also out of character for Alex. In addition, a Taser is only effective within 15 feet and the police claim to have fired their first rounds at 75 feet.
It doesn’t make any sense.
Civil Rights’ attorney Pointer doesn’t expect police misconduct to change anytime soon. This makes more sense.
There are ingrained and deeply entrenched race and class prejudices that permeate our whole society. More than personal change is required such behavioral training of individual cops and cameras on their chest.
One such institutional transformation that hopefully makes it into the very important national conversation would be Black and Latino community control of police in their communities. Local democratically elected boards would replace downtown control by the 1% establishment.
It’s a revival of a still very relevant idea from the Black Panther Party platform of the 1960s.
In the meantime, Pointer tells me, “I don’t want anyone to be above the law, police included.”
Carl Finamore is a delegate to the San Francisco Labor Council, AFL-CIO. He can be reached at local1781@yahoo.com









