Gay porn actor dies after trying to swallow drugs and chokes on them when tazed-video

[buckeye-leaf]

I have compassion ,

But this guy didn't have much of a Brain .
And the Cops always get the blame all the time .
I see the cops trying there best to save this guys life .

taze him oh yeah thats saving him...... come on man pull yer head outta yer ass

 

[NiteTiger]

taze him thats saving him come on man pull yer head outta yer ass

No, the saving him was when they did the Heimlich. You make it sound like he started choking and then got tased for it.

 

[buckeye-leaf]

nite bud he got tazed, i understand if he killed or hurt someone bro

 

[ithinkiam]

No, the saving him was when they did the Heimlich. You make it sound like he started choking and then got tased for it.

What if the man was already choking before they tased him? Did the cops even know the pot baggie was in his mouth before they tased him? And if so, wouldn't that mean that the cops knowingly put his life at risk when they made the decision to tase him when he had a plastic bag in his mouth/throat?

 

[NiteTiger]

nite bud he got tazed, i understand if he killed or hurt someone bro

Well, that's what I'm saying though. He was hurting someone, he was shoving a chick around the parking lot. Then he got to fighting the cops.

He wasn't just standing there smoking a j, the taser was deserved, he was violent and out of control.

And again, what would you have had them do? Without the taser, it would have been batons. So getting beaten with steel rods would have been better?

What option would you have had them use? Beat and kick him black and blue?

I just think folks aren't thinking this all the way through. The Taser is demonized, when it's the LEAST harmful option.

What if the man was already choking before they tased him? Did the cops even know the pot baggie was in his mouth before they tased him? And if so, wouldn't that mean that the cops knowingly put his life at risk when they made the decision to tase him when he had a plastic bag in his mouth/throat?

If the guy had been choking, doing as he did when he began motioning to the cops that he couldn't breathe, and they Tased him anyway?

I'd be fucking livid. That would be clearly out of line, and, in my opinion, a malicious act. There would be no justification.

As far as if they knew, we don't know. It's just not clear from the video. My opinion, from the video, is that they were unaware that he had ingested something.

There are specific moves a cop uses when a suspect is trying to swallow evidence. They specifically move to block the swallowing action, with different techniques. I didn't see any indication the officers were aware he had something in his mouth.

In fact, if they had known, I think it would have turned out better, as they would have been working to prevent him from swallowing it, and he wouldn't have choked.

Once again, though, we just can't say with any certainty.

But in your hypothetical situation, hell yeah I think they'd be liable.

But I don't think that's applicable here, I just see no evidence of it.

 

[ithinkiam]

Well, that's what I'm saying though. He was hurting someone, he was shoving a chick around the parking lot. Then he got to fighting the cops.

He wasn't just standing there smoking a j, the taser was deserved, he was violent and out of control.

And again, what would you have had them do? Without the taser, it would have been batons. So getting beaten with steel rods would have been better?

What option would you have had them use? Beat and kick him black and blue?

I just think folks aren't thinking this all the way through. The Taser is demonized, when it's the LEAST harmful option.



If the guy had been choking, doing as he did when he began motioning to the cops that he couldn't breathe, and they Tased him anyway?

I'd be fucking livid. That would be clearly out of line, and, in my opinion, a malicious act. There would be no justification.

As far as if they knew, we don't know. It's just not clear from the video. My opinion, from the video, is that they were unaware that he had ingested something.

There are specific moves a cop uses when a suspect is trying to swallow evidence. They specifically move to block the swallowing action, with different techniques. I didn't see any indication the officers were aware he had something in his mouth.

In fact, if they had known, I think it would have turned out better, as they would have been working to prevent him from swallowing it, and he wouldn't have choked.

Once again, though, we just can't say with any certainty.

But in your hypothetical situation, hell yeah I think they'd be liable.

But I don't think that's applicable here, I just see no evidence of it.

After I replied I gave exactly what you've said here some thought. It is likely that they DID NOT know that he had swallowed anything, which makes a whole bit of difference when you're trying to point the finger. But like you said, we do not know for sure if they did know. We can only assume based on their actions that they were unaware that he was choking and when they DID realize what was happening they reacted appropriately.

It seems that in either case, it is still a fucking horrible occurance. If he was choking on this bag before getting tased, then that must have felt like dying in Hell..not being able to communicate that you're choking and then being tased on top of it. And if he was not choking before being tased, then the police may truly be responsible for his death. Even though they had no intent to murder him or cause him to start choking. They may have just not thought he was hiding anything in his mouth because that is not even the reason he was being restrained. So, when you consider the possibility that they may have been unaware of said bag, how could they have known to not tase him? Did they even have a chance of avoiding this from happening? And really, supposing this is how it really went down, and supposing that it could be proven, is it even fair to hold them (the police) responsible when they had no idea of the freaking bag in his mouth? :/ Hmm.

I forget what it is called in legal terms... involuntary manslaughter? 3rd degree murder/homocide, right? Do you think the police could potentially be charged with this, even though they were attempting to save his life? Like if the case against them was attempting to prove that it was in fact the tasing that caused the choking to start?

IDK. I'm not a legal expert or anything... :/

But here I am again; back to thinking the whole thing would have gone down a bit differently (without death) had there been more lenient marijuana laws in place. Ugh. Sorry if this post seems redundant, we all seem to be making similar arguments...but writing this out has kind of helped me gain perspective...so, I'm still posting it.

 

[Stoner4Life]

a true shame but I can't blame the cops, soon as they
saw what was happening they did what they could.......

 

[johnnyla]

i didn't realize he swallowed the bag too. hmmmmn. not too smart.

 

[phan]

ugh...depressing

 

[Feyd]

well, kids, sometimes stupid people do stupid things and die stupid deaths.

it's just really depressing to watch it unfold.

and for the record, he got tazed, but he immediately pulled the barbs out. they didn't shoot him with a potato gun and take a hand off. they were overweight, slightly out of shape law enforcement officers who were probably more than happy to go by the book and taze the guy instead of try to wrestle him down.

it is not their FAULT that he died.

 

[]A[Boss]

lot of cop lovers here it seems....

..save your excuses

 

[NiteTiger]

I forget what it is called in legal terms... involuntary manslaughter? 3rd degree murder/homocide, right? Do you think the police could potentially be charged with this, even though they were attempting to save his life? Like if the case against them was attempting to prove that it was in fact the tasing that caused the choking to start?

-------begintextwall---------------

No, I don't think they could be charged in this instance from what is seen on the video. I think that the sudden muscle contractions from the Taser did indeed cause him to start choking. However, the requisite intent is not there. They did not intend to cause him to choke, or cause serious injury, which would preclude a murder charge.

As to reckless homicide, you don't need to have the intent to kill or cause injury. The lack of intent is actually what makes it reckless homicide. If you define that phrase, you see the difference. Poor judgment (reckless) resulting in the death of another (homicide). Involuntary manslaughter means the same thing.

Reckless homicide is usually defined in legal terms as creating a situation that a reasonable person would conclude is likely to cause another serious injury or death.

Here's a couple of examples that may help clarify the difference.

Take the example of firing a gun into the air. If that round comes down and kills someone, that's reckless homicide. The reason being is that a reasonable person would think that firing a gun is likely to cause serious injury or death. Compound that by with the reckless act of firing that weapon without regard to where the round is going, and there you have reckless homicide.

The person didn't mean to kill anybody, he was just celebrating. But when you fire a gun without taking precautions against someone getting hurt, you're still responsible for whatever that bullet does.

Now, on the flip side, let's say someone is hunting on private land. He fires a round, and it goes through and through. Unfortunately, someone is trespassing out of sight in the woods, and the round kills them. In this case there is no crime, just a tragic accident.

The reason here is that that hunter took reasonable precautions, and had no way of knowing that a dangerous situation existed. He was on private land, no one else should have been there. That's a reasonable precaution. He was also firing at a specific target. He also didn't know that the person was there because he could not see them.

There is no reasonable way that hunter could have known a dangerous situation was being created. In actuality, the hiker actually created the situation by trespassing on private land.

Now, if the hunter is poaching in a public park then you're back to reckless homicide.

See the difference? If the person taking the reckless action is the one who causes the death, it's reckless homicide.

At its simplest form, it comes down to common sense. Or, in legal terms, reasonableness.

In the situation we have with the officers, you can apply this almost like an equation. Common sense tells you not to swallow plastic bags. It can kill you. However, the officers were following the guidelines of the use of force, and the use of force was reasonable given the violent actions the suspect was taking.

Plus, there is no assumption that the Taser would be likely to cause serious injury or a death. In fact, it is the LEAST likely of the options available to cause serious injury or death. It is used thousands of times across this country daily, with no lasting effects or permanent injury.

The reckless act here was in the swallowing of a plastic bag. Not in the use of the Taser. There was even another reckless act of fighting with the police. In essence, he even determined the level of force the officers used.

On top of that, you have the officers attempts to prevent the loss of life.

Hopefully, that giant wall of text helps you understand why this, from what we know, isn't a reckless homicide.

----/endwalltext------

TL;DR

Recklessness is determined by Common sense. Common sense says don't swallow plastic.

But here I am again; back to thinking the whole thing would have gone down a bit differently (without death) had there been more lenient marijuana laws in place.

Agreed. Yet another death on the hands of the ONDCP.

 

[NiteTiger]

lot of cop lovers here it seems....

..save your excuses

Nope, just a lot of logical thinkers instead of followers of the herd.

 

[dankitydank]

Not very smart swallowing the bag, but thats not the issue at hand.
Tragedy such a young man's life was cut short, over something so easy to avoid, what a horrific chain of events.
RIP

 

[ithinkiam]

-------begintextwall---------------

No, I don't think they could be charged in this instance from what is seen on the video. I think that the sudden muscle contractions from the Taser did indeed cause him to start choking. However, the requisite intent is not there. They did not intend to cause him to choke, or cause serious injury, which would preclude a murder charge.

As to reckless homicide, you don't need to have the intent to kill or cause injury. The lack of intent is actually what makes it reckless homicide. If you define that phrase, you see the difference. Poor judgment (reckless) resulting in the death of another (homicide). Involuntary manslaughter means the same thing.

Reckless homicide is usually defined in legal terms as creating a situation that a reasonable person would conclude is likely to cause another serious injury or death.

Here's a couple of examples that may help clarify the difference.

Take the example of firing a gun into the air. If that round comes down and kills someone, that's reckless homicide. The reason being is that a reasonable person would think that firing a gun is likely to cause serious injury or death. Compound that by with the reckless act of firing that weapon without regard to where the round is going, and there you have reckless homicide.

The person didn't mean to kill anybody, he was just celebrating. But when you fire a gun without taking precautions against someone getting hurt, you're still responsible for whatever that bullet does.

Now, on the flip side, let's say someone is hunting on private land. He fires a round, and it goes through and through. Unfortunately, someone is trespassing out of sight in the woods, and the round kills them. In this case there is no crime, just a tragic accident.

The reason here is that that hunter took reasonable precautions, and had no way of knowing that a dangerous situation existed. He was on private land, no one else should have been there. That's a reasonable precaution. He was also firing at a specific target. He also didn't know that the person was there because he could not see them.

There is no reasonable way that hunter could have known a dangerous situation was being created. In actuality, the hiker actually created the situation by trespassing on private land.

Now, if the hunter is poaching in a public park then you're back to reckless homicide.

See the difference? If the person taking the reckless action is the one who causes the death, it's reckless homicide.

At its simplest form, it comes down to common sense. Or, in legal terms, reasonableness.

In the situation we have with the officers, you can apply this almost like an equation. Common sense tells you not to swallow plastic bags. It can kill you. However, the officers were following the guidelines of the use of force, and the use of force was reasonable given the violent actions the suspect was taking.

Plus, there is no assumption that the Taser would be likely to cause serious injury or a death. In fact, it is the LEAST likely of the options available to cause serious injury or death. It is used thousands of times across this country daily, with no lasting effects or permanent injury.

The reckless act here was in the swallowing of a plastic bag. Not in the use of the Taser. There was even another reckless act of fighting with the police. In essence, he even determined the level of force the officers used.

On top of that, you have the officers attempts to prevent the loss of life.

Hopefully, that giant wall of text helps you understand why this, from what we know, isn't a reckless homicide.

----/endwalltext------

TL;DR

Recklessness is determined by Common sense. Common sense says don't swallow plastic.



Agreed. Yet another death on the hands of the ONDCP.

Good examples here. I see what you mean now.

 

[SpasticGramps]

I didn't realize he was shoving some chick around the parking lot and being violent at first.

If you are beating on somebody and a cop walks up on you, what's gonna happen?

Do be f'ing stupid and start fights in public. And a girl at that.

That changes my opinion on the matter quite a bit.

 

[kmk420kali]

...

 

[Big Foot]

That was absolutely horrible and heart wrenching to watch.

What the fuck are these pigs trained for if they can't clear a fucking airway or perform a trac? I had to be certified to do that shit to pass the 11th grade!!


Disgusting. Cops, kids should have to watch how daddy was a do nothing coward who panicked while violating someones civil rights.......


Hope that pig chokes on his pork chop and all the pot heads at the restruant watch his fat ass gasp for air.

They were using proper procedures, in the video you can cleary see one of the pigs shining a flashlight down his throat to try to obtain the blockage, but he keep resisting. If they preformed a trac he would also have the right to sue them afterwards. Sad sad loss but no the police officers faults they tried to save him.

 

[Stoner4Life]

back in NYC if you tried swallowing the evidence the cops would take their billy club and gut punch you hard with it (street Heimlich) and you'd spill your guts instantly. that might have helped here if done soon enough but then what would we all be saying about a cop gut punching someone?

 

[ithinkiam]

back in NYC if you tried swallowing the evidence the cops would take their billy club and gut punch you hard with it (street Heimlich) and you'd spill your guts instantly. that might have helped here if done soon enough but then what would we all be saying about a cop gut punching someone?

Truth. What would we all be saying about this entire thing if that guy hadn't ever even died? He was beating up some girl, was in possession of pot, and attempted to swallow it when policemen confronted him, but he didn't choke on it, or die, and the policemen did nothing wrong- that man should have known better. Amirite?

Death can change everything. But should it?

Idk... just some thoughts I'm having.