digg

Join DiggAbout

This is What Happens When You Complain to the LAPD watch!

media.putfile.com — A young man enters the LA County Sheriffs station to obtain a complaint form. He is then detained, searched and threatened.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • eckre, on 10/10/2007, -3/+49this is good. who is going to police the police is the question....
    • saleem, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22coast guard?
    • wofldibofl, on 10/10/2007, -2/+31youtube ?
    • holygram, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Digg?
    • LexisNexis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14We should have anti-police, they have purple lights on their cars and only bust cops who are doing illegal things.
    • CornStarch, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Someone call Sting!
    • PrettyMuchBryce, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6police police police police.
      • RpgActioN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
    • rocko_stazetti, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Internal Affairs
    • sexybobo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1um the court system? which is why it is illegal to keep some one more that 24 hours with out filing charges in court.
      • evenson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2As long as you're not a "terrorist". Maybe you missed the fact that the right of Habeas Corpus doesn't exist in the United States anymore.
        • cawpin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Or as long as you're not Kevin Mitnick
    • NSResponder, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Generally speaking, in the USA it's the press that watches the police. That's why the first amendment is so critical.

      -jcr
    • djlights, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3 ...dig me down
  • MasterMynd, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2lol priceless
  • eckre, on 10/10/2007, -3/+36Will someone post some details on what the officer's name is, and where I can email superiors? OR lemme guess, it has to go through him first.
    • ATH025, on 10/10/2007, -24/+1He didn't do anything wrong...
    • CornStarch, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Other than bully, intimidate, and lie to a civilian about his right to receive a complaint form without giving any identification.
    • Urusai, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3After a thorough internal investigation, the police commissioner has decided that all officers involved obeyed all applicable laws and procedures, and that the public should watch what it does because they might get a stick up the ass. Just ask Abner Louima.
  • mablco, on 10/10/2007, -16/+31cops are so pathetic
    • TGMD, on 10/10/2007, -17/+13the one in the video may be, but I doubt you'll have that sentiment when your getting robed.
      • mablco, on 10/10/2007, -12/+8#1 "you're" #2 "robbed" #3 stop sticking up for pigs and get back in school.
        • Crimsoneer, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10How about you show some respect for the reason there is any law whatsoever on our friggin streets. I'm from London, and I can tell you for one London would be one massive pile of ***** without the met.
        • Thefascist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6This could be good or it could be bad, these cops maybe doing things that aren't exactly to the letter of the law but they are good at hunting down criminals, on the other hand cops being afraid of liability may choose to not even pursue or arrest anyone, something that I experienced firsthand.
      • psyckboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10I don't normally wear robes. Is there a connection between robes and police?
      • roastnewt1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Funny, I was robbed last month, and it just reinforced that sentiment for me. Especially after I called it in and they said they'd be right over, but never ***** showed up.
      • masgrada, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Yea, you'll wish there was a cop to help you this time!
      • darkzealot89, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3CCW, because a cop is too big to carry around.
    • kcpwnsgman, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10Just because of a few isolated issues like this does not make all officers evil, just like how making blind assumptions and ***** hate doesn't come from all diggers.
    • JerodSlay, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I did get robbed. They didn't do jack.
  • Numarx, on 10/10/2007, -3/+64seems like when they thought it was an undercover bust they changed their attitude and got all nice and professional again. It seems if your in a position of power in America you can break the law and act like a fascist ***** in the process. This is becoming very common lately.
  • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24The guy walks like he's a mech robot.
    • Crumbles, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3HAHAHAHA! I just watched the start of the video again and you're right. That's hilarious.

      YES. I love clicking CHECK SPELLING instead of SUBMIT. ***** digg comments.
    • ICSU, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I thought he was a cowboy.
    • monroetransfer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0HAHAHAHAHA that is exactly what I was thinking when I saw him walking in the beginning.
    • Machuse, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I thought he was going to shoot up the place...I didnt know what he was doing
  • donkeydrop, on 10/10/2007, -38/+5Buried as inaccurate. Waste the police's time by being an incoherent buffoon who sounds like he's on drugs and won't actually say what he wants, and you get what you deserve. You went there to jerk them around, and guess what .. they didn't like it.
    • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The cop gets owned at 10:00 though.
    • an0nymous, on 10/10/2007, -1/+22He said he wanted a complaint form. They didn't want to give it to him.
      He had broken no laws, and was not offensive. There was no jerking around.
      He sounded coherent to me. Scared (justifiably) but his intent was clear.
      I guess by "sounds like he was on drugs" you mean he was a lower income black guy and spoke like it. right?
      All they had to do was give him the form.
      Noone is above the law.
      • kcpwnsgman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6There is no form, the form that gets filled out is numbered, is for internal use and cannot leave the station, there is a phone number to call that is automated that will not put them in the position of talking to the Sargent.
    • Sp4nk, on 10/10/2007, -10/+16The cop says right off the bat, "I explained to you earlier..." which obviously means his earlier visits weren't taped. For all we know, this guy could've made a half dozen visits to this station and acted like a complete ass before becoming Mr. Hidden Camera Investigation Guy. Regardless of the cop's behavior, which shouldn't be a shock to anyone, the whole story isn't here. Buried.
      • Cmonkey67, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8I was waiting for the idiot who would say we don't have the full story.

        Thank you. A police station (or Sheriff's dept.) is public property, which everyone has a right to enter at any time for any reason. If he is asked to leave the property by the authorities that is a different thing all together but that didn't happen. Therefor, it doesn't matter how many times he came in and jerked anyone around, in a legal standpoint the issue at hand is: A young black male entered the Los Angeles Sheriffs Dept. requesting a complaint form. The man in question did not understand the procedure and process of forming a complaint (which cannot be held against him). None of this gives any officer the right to detain a person and his property. (I know the officer said he "wasn't being detained" but when you come up behind a person blocking them inside a building and physically restrain them (you can hear the man tell the officer his wallet is in his back pocket, which leaves you to assume that he has no use of his hands at that point) and then proceed to do a detailed search and then seize their property, that is detention, by the definition). You can argue all you want about how "we don't have the full story", but guess what we never will, neither will a judge or anyone else except for the man in question and the officers involved. Regardless what we can clearly see on this tape is a violation of someones civil liberties, and you can take that to a judge.

        Not to mention he was threatened with bodily harm for no reason, but hey! we don't know the full story, right?
    • TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Hey, it's NEVER appropriate for a cop to tell someone he's gonna send him to the hospital.
      • dvda2, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Not even to a KKK?
        • BelXul, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Not even. Whether someone likes it or not, there's a reason why civil liberties are to be extended to everyone, regardless of their opinions.
  • HastyBoom, on 10/10/2007, -11/+2nice........(buffering)........band-.........(buffering).......width!
  • Xarddrax, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Barney Fife complex. This crap makes me sick.
  • dreicher, on 10/10/2007, -5/+31The L.A. County Sheriff's Office is not the LAPD. The LAPD has an external intake process for civilian complaints - it's even alluded to by Officer Friendly in the video. Nice work poster - way to completely screw things up in ten words or less.
  • cptpike, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20This really is a shame. Hopefully we can get this to the front page and have someone shed some light on it. I really hate it when anyone abuses authority.
  • ReturnToFreedom, on 10/10/2007, -1/+34I don't think that this is what the authors of the constitution had in mind.
  • dvda2, on 10/10/2007, -16/+7Okay while I agree this sucks please use your brains.
    LA County Sheriff DOES NOT EQUAL LAPD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! totally different entities.
    MY GOD, even in the video the guy says he is not LAPD, this poster is an idiot
    • sharkoman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Even though the video quality is poor, its terribly easy to spot the difference as well. LAPD = all black uniform while the Sheriff's department wear a beige shirt with dark green pants.
    • TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Settle down, pal. He made a fairly reasonable mistake, so he's "obviously" an idiot? Do "gifted" folks like yourself need 29 consecutive exclamation points to get an idea across? "MY GOD" he exclaimed! Gonna give yourself a heart attack...
      • dvda2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1No dummy, its not a fairly reasonable mistake, if you actually knew how LAPD and Sheriff actually thought of each other you would know that LAPD would be seriously offended to be labeled sherriff. But "gifted" folks like yourself prefer living under the rock. MY GOD is right ... if a rapist called trevarBelmont was loose and everyone thought it was you you'd be throwing out the exclamation points too.

        Look, I know hat happened was wrong, my point is the irresponsible topic seriously damages LAPD reputation more so than it already is and necessary.
  • budgetguitar, on 10/10/2007, -3/+38Way to perpetuate the stereotype officer 'hospital visit'. And the police wonder why people don't trust them. It's douche-nozzles like this that give cops a bad name. Bad cop, no donut.
  • 0zzy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17The hell, what is wrong with the world?
    • sparf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Those who are granted power will abuse it, in some form or another. That's what's wrong with it.
  • Stochio, on 10/10/2007, -2/+29Nice "hospital" line, you ass.
  • W00DR0W, on 10/10/2007, -1/+76Just to clarify, officers are legally required to give you the complaint form and you do not have to answer questions before hand
  • Handofgod, on 10/10/2007, -15/+6Not really sure about all the laws... but its a given the cop was wrong. However the retard made himself sound so suspicious I think any cop would want to detain and question him. Would of been better if he didn't act so stupid when he got there.
    • DoctorX, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4How he acted was irrelevant. At no stage did he break the law and the cop did not have probable cause. The cop broke protocol and violated the cameraman's civil rights. He only acquiesced we he realised that the second man was savvy about his rights.
      What these guys did took enormous stones. We owe them a debt for showing us how to stand up for ourselves.
    • BlackOp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Would've.
  • tech9lab, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6cops suck! especially LACOunty sheriff
  • Yankees368, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20I love the pen clicking by the officer at 10:45....he knows hes in trouble at that point
  • EscapeVelocity, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Serve and Protect baby
  • kob0724, on 10/10/2007, -9/+21Don't get me wrong, I'm all for holding those in power and anyone else for that matter accountable for their actions. But the sweeping generalizations that seem to crop up about cops on digg always make me wince when ever I read them. Yes, there are some dumb cops out there who make some pretty huge mistakes. But there are also many cops out there who risk their lives everyday. I've been on a few ride-a-longs and I must say my experience gave me deep respect for police officers. Once you watch a man console a woman who's husband just committed suicide while trying to protect the crime scene at the same time, or tirelessly give CPR to some one until the medics arrive even though the person is probably a gonner, you can't help but have a little respect for him.
    • DoctorX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15My brother was one of the good cops you speak of, an officer of the Western Australian Police Force. He'd go out of his way to help people, such as driving little old ladies home late at night. The harder he tried to serve the public trust, the more he was ridiculed by his fellow officers for his efforts, most of which were just school bullies turned pro. He recently quit the force in disgust.

      So yeah, I ***** hate cops.
    • Rooster99, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Totally agree with you kob0724, but DoctorX has a valid point. My brother works for the Australian Federal Police and he tells me the condition the majority of police outfits across the country is in, is embarrassing. All the experienced, high-ranking officers are now being payed on a contract basis, so they they are easily replaced! This makes them even more high strung in a high pressure job!

      But my brother says the worst thing about the police force in its current state. is the amount of high-school bullies and jocks that are being recruited. Its been like that for at least 10 years in NSW. I don't usually make generalizations, however these days when I have to talk to a cop (breath tested, randomly questioned, etc....) I usually assume they are going to try and ***** me. It's a pleasant surprise to see the occasional cop that is doing their job, and is polite, respectful and actually believes in the laws that the are upholding.
    • sintaxi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Im sorry, you cant judge a cop by how he treats someone who just lost their husband or by how he performs CPR on someone who is dyiing. A good cop treats everyone with respect, even criminals.
  • W00DR0W, on 10/10/2007, -0/+39I just looked up who posted the video, he's a retired sheriff deputy.
  • willcoll, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6geez, that was noisy...did he have the camera straped to his head with ducktape
    • leftfield, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6he was wearing that michael jackson jacket with a hundred zippers
  • 8bit_Hero, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10The L.A. County Sheriff's Office is not the LAPD.
  • Soriven, on 10/10/2007, -1/+42"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."
    • mal1964, on 10/10/2007, -16/+3People should not be afraid of their ***** sheriff. ***** sheriff should be afraid of their people." One stupid comment deserves another .
      • MozzieTS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8your stupid comment deserves to be buried
        • mal1964, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3LOL I agree
        • mal1964, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1your stupid comment deserves to be buried

          that's all I got after watching a 20 min video. I don't know the whole story to make some of the ridiculous statements I'm reading.
  • dsheli, on 10/10/2007, -16/+7Give the cops a break, you will not believe the kind of ***** they have to deal with everyday.
    • CornStarch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Like ***** and threatening civilians from behind a badge.
  • Gryffydd, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4I'm confused. The title says LAPD, the description says LA county Sheriff's station.
    LAPD != LA County Sheriff.

    EDIT: I left my browser on this page for a while before I commented and apparently everybody else posted this already...
  • willcoll, on 10/10/2007, -12/+5Im pretty sure when you're asked for ID by an officer, you have to present it.
    • slipgrid, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7I'm sure you are wrong.
      • Urusai, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Actually, that's the only information you are required to give them without a lawyer. Failure to ID has held up in court. Personally, I think it's bogus, but that's the law currently.
    • aggrogeek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You're sadly mistaken. The only catch 22 situation I can think of when you are forced to present a driver's license is when a cop pulls you over, because the law states that you must carry a license to operate a motor vehicle. However, even that is a legal grey area, and in most cases you should be able to refuse giving identification. Officer ***** from the video states that you must always carry identification, and you must always be willing to present it to the police, but this is either a lie, or a huge misunderstanding of the law on his part.
      • aggrogeek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Here is an excerpt taken from flexyourrights.org:

        7. When do I have to show ID?

        This is a tricky issue. As a general principle, citizens who are minding their own business are not obligated to "show their papers" to police. In fact, there is no law requiring citizens to carry identification of any kind.

        Nonetheless, carrying an ID is required when you’re driving or flying. Driving without a license is a crime, and no one is allowed to board an airplane without first presenting an ID. These requirements have been upheld on the premise that individuals who prefer not to carry ID can choose not to drive or fly.

        From here, ID laws only get more complicated. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the Supreme Court upheld state laws requiring citizens to disclose their identity to police when officers have reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity may be taking place. Commonly known as 'stop and identify' statutes, these laws permit police to arrest criminal suspects who refuse to identify themselves.

        Currently the following states have stop and identify laws: AL, AR, CO, DE, FL, GA, IL, KS, LA, MO, MT, NE, NH, NM, NV, NY, ND, RI, UT, VT, WI

        Regardless of your state's law, keep in mind that police can never compel you to identify yourself without reasonable suspicion to believe you're involved in criminal activity. Rather than asking the officer if he/she has reasonable suspicion, test it yourself by asking if you're free to go.

        If the officer says you’re free to go, leave immediately and refrain from answering any additional questions.

        If the officer detains you, you'll have to decide whether withholding your identity is worth the possibility of arrest or a prolonged detention. In cases of mistaken identity, revealing who you are might help to resolve the situation quickly. On the other hand, if you're on parole in California, for example, revealing your identity could lead to a legal search. Knowing your state's laws can help you make the best choice.

        Keep in mind that the officer's decision to detain you will not always hold up in court. ‘Reasonable suspicion' is a vague evidentiary standard, which lends itself to mistakes on the officer's part. If you're searched or arrested following an officer's ID request, always contact an attorney to discuss the incident and explore your legal options.
  • ATH025, on 10/10/2007, -14/+6The guy was acting sketchy, the cop asked him his name and he avoided the question for like 10 minutes.
    • ATH025, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3Also, "I don't have to tell you my name, BUT I WANT YOUR NAME BUSINESS CARD etc" Something's wrong there lol
      The cops kept pretty cool to be honest.
      • BonerMachine, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10The police are in a position of authority, but don't forget that they serve the public. They work for us. It's not the other way around.
    • CornStarch, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8The cop just blatantly lied about the man's rights, and that is a person you would entrust your name to? They are supposed to hand you the form no questions asked by department policy.
      • Flynnz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Is that policy for every police station? (I honestly do not know) cause it doesn't seem insane that they would have complaints go to someone at the station, who then fills out a form. (for many reasons ...bad hand writing, something severe that could require immediate attention, or to have someone expand on some information that they may not feel was important). To me it sounds like it should be policy to NOT have someone just fill out a complaint form.....I mean if we are talking about Friendly's restaurant or something maybe, but something against the Police I would think would have to be more formal. (even via 800 number where they can talk to the person)
        • TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2If there is anyone who should not be involved in the filling out of a police complaint form, it is the police. No checks and balances.
        • Flynnz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2makes sense to a degree....but then he could have easily used the 800 number provided by the officer. And lets be honest, what "checks. and balances" would there be if they left that form? you think they would only try and pull something fishy while the person is there?

          Bottom like to me on this is...without a doubt, the cops were WRONG on this. No one can dispute that. But that still doesn't mean that the guy making the video wasnt trying to stir up as much ***** as possible cause he had a cam. The fact that he wouldn't just use the 800 number proves this beyond a doubt. He wanted a reaction from the police, and they were dumb enough to give him one. Plain and simple.
      • CornStarch, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Yes that is the policy of most metropolitan police departments. If someone was making a complaint of police intimidation would it make sense for them to talk with another officer? And Handwriting is a pretty lame reason.
        • Flynnz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1well that's cool to know....I never heard that. Seems kinda wacky to me as a policy, but what the hell do I know? heh.

          And honestly.....Hand writing can sometimes be very hard to read, and/or easy to read incorrectly. So I don't think that makes it a "lame" reason at all.
          I also agree that if its police intimidation you may feel weird talking to a police officer...however he could have used the 800 number provided by the officer if that was the issue. And for what its worth, if I was worried about being inteimdated by the police, I would have used the phone to begin with, NOT go into the police station.

          But none the less thanks for the info.
        • TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I don't think they teach penmanship at the police acadamy so handwriting doesn't hold up. When a witness fills out a statement, the witness writes it.
        • Flynnz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I hear what you are saying...but you have to remember if there is a hand writing issue by the officer, they can easily get that same officer to read the complaint form.
          If it's an issue with someone who didnt want to leave their name on said form however...then what? "oh well maybe they will come back cause they sensed we couldn't understand what they said". I would hope that they take the complaints a little more serious than that.
  • Sithxace, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Was this a real sting or just 2 nomal guys?
    • foxymcfox, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Seems like a normal guy and a local civil rights vigilante who is helping him out.
  • thuang513, on 10/10/2007, -13/+4video becomes awesome when the other black guy comes and owns that cop, what now mutha *****?

    note: what was the point of seizing the tape? if he took out parts of the video (explainin the black screens), why wasnt this dumbass donut muncher take out the audio?
  • thuang513, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1video becomes awesome when the other black guy comes and owns that cop, what now mutha *****?

    note: what was the point of seizing the tape? if he took out parts of the video (explainin the black screens), why wasnt this dumbass donut muncher take out the audio?
  • thuang513, on 10/10/2007, -12/+0video becomes awesome when the other black guy comes and owns that cop, what now mutha *****?

    note: what was the point of seizing the tape? if he took out parts of the video (explainin the black screens), why wasnt this dumbass donut muncher take out the audio?
  • thuang513, on 10/10/2007, -12/+0video becomes awesome when the other black guy comes and owns that cop, what now mutha *****?

    note: what was the point of seizing the tape? if he took out parts of the video (explainin the black screens), why wasnt this dumbass donut muncher take out the audio?
  • thuang513, on 10/10/2007, -13/+2video becomes awesome when the other black guy comes and owns that cop, what now mutha *****?

    note: what was the point of seizing the tape? if he took out parts of the video (explainin the black screens), why wasnt this dumbass donut muncher take out the audio?
  • cramd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14I am surprised that they got the tape back, or that it had not suffered and "issue" during his "reviewing" process.
  • Lax32, on 10/10/2007, -19/+5That guy came in looking to start problems.

    Rediculous. Hes the same type of person who goes around trying to find ways to sue big companies. He isnt some innocent bystander, he is a guy trying to get a reaction out of people.

    Buried as lame.
  • CornStarch, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3thuang513

    Another victim of Digg's delayed comment system.
    • TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2and thalidomide.
      • trurevmbr07, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1ive never seen any1 post that many times in a row.......hilarious
      • Machuse, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0...this made my day
  • jellygraph, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13To be honest, the sheriff looked rather sheep-ish towards the end and you kinda feel sorry for him... kinda. The sheriff had no right to detain this guy, seize his property and demand identification. He was innocent and there was no cause for him to threaten him. All he had to say was, "Sorry, we do not hand out complaint forms. That's just the rules and I honestly can't help you."

    So, why didn't he?

    I'm thinking he tried to bully the guy, thinking that he might have something to complain that might put him or someone else important in trouble.
  • mercuryfalling, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3You don't have to go to the Cops to file a complain on them! You can go to the City safety director and then file the complain on cops there. They Also pay them too!
    • m8ymerc1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's not the point. The cop is mandated to give the complaint form to gentleman and leave it at that. The cop has no business doing or saying anything else to the person.
    • stinkfart, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No, you can't. You can't go to the CITY safety director to complain about the COUNTY Sheriff.
  • claytorris, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9Even on this site so many ***** still believe that government officials rule the people, and we should just do what they want us to do, because they said so. ***** nutless pussies.
  • rlahiff, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Holy ***** did this video piss me off at this cop. I hope he gets fired.
  • rlahiff, on 10/10/2007, -0/+34Here is the individual that took the video.

    Paul Wesley Parker, III -- Staff Investigator
    Undergraduate Studies, University of Nebraska

    Paul Wesley Parker joined the firm as the senior staff investigator in October 2006. Mr. Parker is a nationally recognized seasoned staff criminal investigator. The vast majority of Mr. Parker's clients regularly face serious felony charges, with potential sentences ranging anywhere from 5 years to life imprisonment.

    Mr. Parker frequently assists in preparing criminal defenses, locating witnesses, serving legal documents, interviewing police and prospective witnesses, and gathering and reviewing evidence. Mr. Parker also collects information on the parties to litigation, takes photographs, testifies repeatedly in court, and assembles evidence and reports for trials.

    Mr. Parker is a seasoned investigator whose services are regularly sought out by numerous legal professionals. Mr. Parker came into national prominence related to his investigations during the Reginald Denny trial in the early 1990's. As a result of his investigative work, Mr. Parker has been interviewed on numerous television news shows, including, but not limited to, Dateline NBC, FOX News in Texas, New Jersey and New York, and CNN Headline News. Mr. Parker's former corporate clients include Dateline NBC, MTV and FOX News. Some of Mr. Parker's former criminal clients include the late Tupac Shakur, OJ Simpson, Ray Arnold, and the LA Four defendants in the Reginald Denny case.

    http://www.lutilaw.com/thefirm_pwp.htm
    • ShadySpace, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So he's like the Phoenix Wright of LA?
  • geminus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Just contacted KTLA... is there any more information on this video, like the cop's name, station, etc?
  • thePFY, on 10/10/2007, -18/+4Have to agree with gatorade666 100%. In all fairness they went into the police station with the sole intention of provoking the cop! At what point is enough enough? From what I gather from the start of the clip that individual was already in the police station earlier and was told the complaint procedure. He was repeatedly given his options but refused to co-operate. From what I can see these two people provoked the cop into that response while deliberately filming the proceedings with the intention of getting a sensationalist story. If that doesn't sound like a setup then i don't know what does.I will admit I'm not from America but do u guys not have anything against "wasting police time"????
    • knut, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5No. We pay their salaries.
      • thePFY, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4ah the old "we pay ur wages" saying, never get tired of hearing that one. Working with that logic they "pay" themselves to be there too! Seeing that you personally "pay" them would there be any chance "you" would give them a bit of a raise so? Im sure you would want more than what they are being payed to put up with all that bs if you were in their position? Taking all that crap all day has to put a bit of a damper on the old enthusiasm to help the public! I mean like u won't have any hesitation in calling them when ur in trouble asking for "their" help now would you!
        • knut, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8Sure I'll give them a raise, as soon as they stop beating up inner city blacks and hispanics for no reason. The LA County Sheriff are especially famous for this. Since I grew up in South Central L.A. (Slauson/Broadway bitches!), unlike yourself, I know what I am talking about.
        • thePFY, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Fair enough dude! i'll yield to you on that, im not familiar with the background story of the LA County Sheriff at all. What i will say though is that from an external perspective i can't see too much wrong with the cops behaviour in that clip, but that just me.
    • Habemus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Why couldn't the sheriff just hand him the damn complaint form and be done with it?
      • dvda2, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0I guess you did not see the video in entirety. The seargent explained that he has to keep the form that they had.
    • TrevorBelmont, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3His "options" were bunk. They are required to give you complaint forms. He was trying to protect his own rather than do his job.
    • DoctorX, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1How do you know that their sole intention was to provoke the cop? Do you have some back story that we're not privy to? Their motive isn't even relevant -- they did not break any laws. The cop was in the wrong. How many others has he given the same treatment to in the past? I suspect more than a few based on his actions in the video. What the cameramen did may result in the cop's being held accountable. What they did took guts.
  • dsheli, on 10/10/2007, -15/+2Cops are people to, you come and start ***** him then they are going to get pissed.
    • thePFY, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0ah the old "we pay ur wages" saying, never get tired of hearing that one. Seeing that you personally "pay" them would there be any chance "you" would give them a bit of a raise so? Im sure you would want more than what they are being payed to put up with all that bs if you were in their position? Taking all that crap all day has to put a bit of a damper on the old enthusiasm to help the public! I mean like u won't have any hesitation in calling them when ur in trouble asking for "their" help now would you!
      • thePFY, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0k that was soo meant to have been in reply to "knut", sry about that dsheli, I agree with ya 100%
  • mozingeaux, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Swamp these ***** with complaints DIGG, c'mon!
    1-323-568-4800
  • stisaac, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1If you're going to complain about a head of a police station, I reckon you should go to a different station.
  • Komodork, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1white man to the rescue?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.