Arizona sheriff hosts 'mugshot of the day' web vote

[Feuer Frei!]

Ms Dierx, who is charged with murder, burglary and armed robbery, is just one of the suspects whose mugshots are being used in a bizarre competition run by a sheriff in Arizona.
Visitors to the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office website, mcso.org (http://mcso.org/), are encouraged to vote on which mugshot "you like best" from among the suspects being held.
Each day the image with the most votes is prominently displayed on the front page of the site.
Voters can choose to browse mugshots by category of felony — arson, assault, fraud, homicide and so on — or enter a first name, last name and booking number.
Understandably, the competition has drawn fire from some — but Sheriff Joe Arpaio says it's a good thing.
"I'm putting these people on the web because maybe someone will recognise the person — 'oh that's the same person who did something to me, or stuck up a store'," he said.
"I think it's a great law enforcement technique."
It seems visitors to the website agree.
Alongside the "mugshot of the day" poll, there's another one — asking whether or not the competition should be allowed to continue.
The results are overwhelmingly in favour. At the time of writing, 84,000 people had voted "yes" and just 20,000 "no".
This isn't the first time Sheriff Arpaio has been in the news for his controversial decisions.
Last month he was criticised for raiding a suspect's house (http://www.kpho.com/news/27272012/detail.html) with several armoured vehicles and a tank carrying Steven Seagal.
An attorney for the suspect accused Sheriff Arpaio of staging the dramatic raid for the benefit of Seagal's TV show Lawman.


SOURCE (http://www.news.com.au/technology/arizona-sheriff-runs-mugshot-of-the-week-web-vote/story-e6frfro0-1226044583902)


"I'm putting these people on the web because maybe someone will recognise the person — 'oh that's the same person who did something to me, or stuck up a store',"
:haha: Errr, yea right.

"I think it's a great law enforcement technique."
Right on Brother. Err...wait, what?
Only in America, right? Or should that be Only in Arizona?

(http://www.news.com.au/technology/arizona-sheriff-runs-mugshot-of-the-week-web-vote/story-e6frfro0-1226044583902)

[nikimcbee]

What did I do wrong?
http://mcso.org/MultiMedia/Mugshots/P760290_0300.jpg

[August]

Making fun of convicts is one thing but people just being charged with a crime do not deserve being mocked and vilified by what they jokingly call law enforcement in that county.

[mookiemookie]

Can I vote for Sherriff Arpaio's mugshot?

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Can I vote for Sherriff Arpaio's mugshot?
:sign_yeah: I would really like to see this option but I doubt it. Mr. Arpaio would propably end up to front page...

[tater]

The tv news stations here have a "today's arrests" section with mugshots, and have for ages. If the information and pictures are in the public domain shouldn't they be available to the citizens at large?

[August]

The tv news stations here have a "today's arrests" section with mugshots, and have for ages. If the information and pictures are in the public domain shouldn't they be available to the citizens at large?

Because it is an invasion of privacy that will have a negative impact on the person being pilloried. I think if the concept of innocent until proven guilty has any meaning then it should not be allowed.

[razark]

If it turns out that a person featured on the website had been worngly arrested, would Sheriff Arpaio be offering a public apology for subjecting him to public disgrace?

[flatsixes]

Mug shots are "public records," as are all arrest records. Consequently, there isn't anything (short of a sense of professional ethics) to prevent their publication. What's interesting here is that it's a government agency doing the publication. Talk about poisoning the jury pool! Maybe Sheriff Whathisname will feel a mite differently about his little stunt after a judge starts tosses cases out left and right. Idiot.

[Tchocky]

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office back in the news. Blech

[AVGWarhawk]

If it turns out that a person featured on the website had been worngly arrested, would Sheriff Arpaio be offering a public apology for subjecting him to public disgrace?

Probably not...he can apologize when the court date is set.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office... :hmmm: Maricopa County Clown's Office rhymes better... or even Maricopa County Clown Office but latter one is a bit unfair to deputies. :D

[Armistead]

I see nothing wrong with if the shots were only people previously arrested and need to be found.
If he's posting pictures of people already in jail for the fun of it, bad idea.

We have a dozen crime shows on TV that post pictures/mugshots of suspects before they've been found guilty, murderers and rapist. Hundreds have been found and convicted. Never heard of one case where it was thrown out of court for being on TV.

Even many local news outlets will show video clips or pictures of possible suspects.

[AVGWarhawk]

I see nothing wrong with if the shots were only people previously arrested and need to be found.

We have a dozen crime shows on TV that post pictures/mugshots of suspects before they've been found guilty, murderers and rapist. Hundreds have been found and convicted. Never heard of one case where it was thrown out of court for being on TV.

Even many local news outlets will show video clips or pictures of possible suspects.

Exactly...much to do about nothing.

[Schroeder]

Exactly...much to do about nothing.
Would you say the same if your daughter was featured on that page just because she came around the wrong corner at the wrong time with some junkies behind it when a police squad raids them? (I know that this isn't a prime example but I can't think up something better right know and I think you know what I mean.;))

[flatsixes]

I see nothing wrong with if the shots were only people previously arrested and need to be found.
If he's posting pictures of people already in jail for the fun of it, bad idea.

We have a dozen crime shows on TV that post pictures/mugshots of suspects before they've been found guilty, murderers and rapist. Hundreds have been found and convicted. Never heard of one case where it was thrown out of court for being on TV.

Even many local news outlets will show video clips or pictures of possible suspects.

Agreed. But the persons publishing the photos in your example were "journalists," not state actors required to prove the guilt of the person photograph beyond a reasonable doubt.

I haven't done any research into the question, but it seems to me likely that any defense lawyer worth his salt would argue that the publication of these photos by the sheriff deprives that accused of his right to a fair and impartial jury.

[AVGWarhawk]

I haven't done any research into the question, but it seems to me likely that any defense lawyer worth his salt would argue that the publication of these photos by the sheriff deprives that accused of his right to a fair and impartial jury.

I do not believe so. What is the difference between a line up for possibly identify the perp? What is the differencedif fingerprints are taken and run in the computer? What is the difference in using a mugshot book? We have to remember the person has been arrested. At that point the Miranda Warning issued. Everything else is fair game. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in the court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?

Above and beyond that....posting pics looks ok to me. :03:

[flatsixes]

I do not believe so. What is the difference between a line up for possibly identify the perp? What is the differencedif fingerprints are taken and run in the computer? What is the difference in using a mugshot book? We have to remember the person has been arrested. At that point the Miranda Warning issued. Everything else is fair game. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in the court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?

Above and beyond that....posting pics looks ok to me. :03:

Not to be a bore, but all of the things that you mentioned - appearing in line-ups and mug books, taking fingerprints, reading Miranda, etc. - are police functions having nothing to do with the Sixth Amendment right to be tried by a fair and impartial jury (at least in those instances where the penalty exceeds six months in the slammer). I can't imagine that any juror who witnessed Joe Blow's line up or fingerprinting, or any other aspect of Mr. Blow's arrest would be be considered "impartial" when it came to seating a jury to determine whether Mr. Blow is guilty as charged. But that's essentially what the Sheriff's done here: tainted the jury pool with widespread dissemination of the mugs shots of the accused. If the NY Times does it, the defense asks for a change in venue. But when the sheriff does it? Well, let's just hope that some predatory dirt bag isn't released to roam the streets because Sheriff Bonehead thought he'd have some fun with the internet.

[August]

At that point the Miranda Warning issued. Everything else is fair game

Well not really. The Miranda warning says nothing about entrapment or falsifying evidence either but that doesn't make them "fair game".

[AVGWarhawk]

Well not really. The Miranda warning says nothing about entrapment or falsifying evidence either but that doesn't make them "fair game".


Where did entrapment and falsifying evidence come into play? The Miranda warning is cut and dry. Shut up if you like. If you talk we can use the information in a court of law. You can hire a ambulance chaser if you like. If your broke arse can not afford one the state will gladly appoint one for them. :hmmm: Fingerprints and pictures to follow. See ya on the net!

[August]

Where did entrapment and falsifying evidence come into play?

You said all else is "fair game". Where in the Miranda warning does it state that the police can smear your picture and name all around town?

Again I have no problem naming and shaming a convicted person but when the cops do it to suspects it crosses the line IMO. Flatsixes' comment about poisoning the jury pool is well noted.

The Miranda warning is cut and dry. Shut up if you like. If you talk we can use the information in a court of law. You can hire a ambulance chaser if you like. If your broke arse can not afford one the state will gladly appoint one for them. :hmmm: Fingerprints and pictures to follow. See ya on the net!

[AVGWarhawk]

Where in the Miranda warning does it state that the police can smear your picture and name all around town


Where does it say it can't? You are under arrest. Rights of the detainee are few.

comment about poisoning the jury pool is well noted.

This is why trials take a year or two before being scheduled. Jury selection process is used. The jury is hand picked by the legal entities involved. Questions are asked of each potential juror. If volatile enough the case is tried in another state.

[August]

Where does it say it can't? You are under arrest. Rights of the detainee are few.

The accused has the same rights as anyone else.

If volatile enough the case is tried in another state.

The chances of which are increased when the Sheriffs department poisons the potential jury pool beforehand.

This is why trials take a year or two before being scheduled

Citation please. Most trials around here are held within a couple of months of an arrest.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

I don't start arguing on whether this is legal or not as I don't know Arizona laws. I say just this.

I understood from info given in article that Mr. Tough Sheriff has put mugshots of everyone they have arrested, suspected or court have found guilty freely available. Okay. Fine. That's not problem if you are found guilty and convicted but what if you are found not guilty? Police makes errors and sometimes new evidence surfaces.

Problem here is that unlike being suspected on or convicted on crime likely exceeds news treshold. Finding someone not guilty usually does not sell in media... So how are you going to get rid of idea that you are suspect or criminal? That people connect your face to robberies or violence crimes for example? Is Mr. Tough Sheriff's office going to buy frontpage advertisement declaring they were wrong and suspect was actually not guilty? I doubt.

[flatsixes]

Again, not trying to be a PITA, but the accused's right to remain silent doesn't permit the arrestee to refuse to have his finger prints or mug shot taken by the police. So I'm not sure how we got Miranda involved in all of this.

[mookiemookie]

I don't start arguing on whether this is legal or not as I don't know Arizona laws. I say just this.

I understood from info given in article that Mr. Tough Sheriff has put mugshots of everyone they have arrested, suspected or court have found guilty freely available. Okay. Fine. That's not problem if you are found guilty and convicted but what if you are found not guilty? Police makes errors and sometimes new evidence surfaces.

Problem here is that unlike being suspected on or convicted on crime likely exceeds news treshold. Finding someone not guilty usually does not sell in media... So how are you going to get rid of idea that you are suspect or criminal? That people connect your face to robberies or violence crimes for example? Is Mr. Tough Sheriff's office going to buy frontpage advertisement declaring they were wrong and suspect was actually not guilty? I doubt.

This is a good point given that Scumbag Sheriff has made a circus sideshow out of "law enforcement as entertainment." There's no good reason to do what he's doing because not everyone the police arrests is guilty. I'm seeing a lot of the childish idea that "oh well gee the police would never arrest someone who wasn't guilty."

Saying it's the same thing as looking up mugshots because they're public record is a false analogy. Your home telephone number, address, and members of your household can all be found through public records. It doesn't mean it's a good idea to post them on a website for entertainment.

[AVGWarhawk]

The accused has the same rights as anyone else.



The chances of which are increased when the Sheriffs department poisons the potential jury pool beforehand.



Citation please. Most trials around here are held within a couple of months of an arrest.

The accused is restrained. His Miranda Rights read. That about ends the list of his rights.

The chances to poison the jury are mininmal. Really, I have guys I work with that went for jury selection. Unless it is a high profile case no one much cares or has seen pictures of the accused. These very high profile case get moved to other states.

Try living in Baltimore MD were the crime rate is a wee bit higher than your neck of the woods. Baltimore is the revolving door of justice and overburden with cases. It can take a year or so for a case of any substance to arrive to trial.

[AVGWarhawk]

This is how Baltimore handles backlogs...





<H1>Prosecutor acts to ease court backlog

November 07, 1995|By Kate Shatzkin | Kate Shatzkin,SUN STAFF
In an attempt to keep more serious cases from being delayed in a Circuit Court backlog, Baltimore State's Attorney Patricia C. Jessamy has changed her office's rules so that more drug offenders will be charged with misdemeanors instead of felonies.
Now a person can be caught with up to 30 rocks of crack cocaine -- or 30 unit bags of heroin or powdered cocaine -- and be charged only with drug possession, a misdemeanor. That's double the amount of drugs that used to qualify offenders for the felony charge of possession with intent to distribute.
"We're six months down the road in terms of scheduling [Circuit Court] cases," Mrs. Jessamy said yesterday. "We need to get them into court as soon as possible. We need to make the system more efficient."

</H1>

[August]

The accused is restrained. His Miranda Rights read. That about ends the list of his rights.

We'll have to agree to disagree AVG.

[AVGWarhawk]

We'll have to agree to disagree AVG.

Yes sir! :salute:

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Yes sir! :salute:
Isn't it SIR YES SIR!!! :hmmm: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8Nf1MK7lts

:D

[Freiwillige]

I could care less either way. Its all to do about nothing really. Sheriff Joe has a system that works. I have friends who have stayed in his tent city (DUI's) and they are determined that they are not going back. Love him or hate him his system works and many of his prior convictions are now his fans.

He gets re-elected easily every time it comes up. He's tough but effective.

[AVGWarhawk]

I could care less either way. Its all to do about nothing really. Sheriff Joe has a system that works. I have friends who have stayed in his tent city (DUI's) and they are determined that they are not going back. Love him or hate him his system works and many of his prior convictions are now his fans.

He gets re-elected easily every time it comes up. He's tough but effective.

and that my friend is probably why the open attacks on his tactics.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

and that my friend is probably why the open attacks on his tactics.
I want to clarify that I'm not "openly attacking" his methods unless they undermine principle of "innocent until otherwise proven". I don't care how he handles his job as long as that principle is not endangered.

[Tribesman]

He gets re-elected easily every time it comes up. He's tough but effective.
Wasn't there something recently about his little county patch having greater increasing crime rates than his other Arizona neighbours?
That would suggest that he is ineffective and his past re election is more to do with plain populism than real achievements.
It will be interesting to see if his standing in the polls will continue to fall away in the run up to his next election as reality cuts through the gimmicks he uses


His Miranda Rights read. That about ends the list of his rights.


The Miranda is solely an item to deal with a small part of two aspects of the suspects rights.
So to sum up someones rights as the reading of one tiny detail is ludicrous AVG and August is correct.

[AngusJS]

I do not believe so. What is the difference between a line up for possibly identify the perp? What is the differencedif fingerprints are taken and run in the computer? What is the difference in using a mugshot book? We have to remember the person has been arrested. At that point the Miranda Warning issued. Everything else is fair game. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in the court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?

Above and beyond that....posting pics looks ok to me. :03:The difference is, only a few people will be called in to see the line up or a mugshot book, and only the cops (initially) have access to the fingerprints. This is completely different from yelling from the roof top "Hey, come and look at who we think is guilty!" as this idiot is doing.

Way, way too many people still think that cops are somehow incapable of error, and that if you've been arrested, you must have done SOMETHING wrong. By advertising it in this foolish way, he is making it harder for the accused to get a fair trial.

[Penguin]

Disgusting. Try to explain the whole "innocent-till-proven-guilty" thing to the employer, who fires their employee when they google the name and find them on a website like this.

Sadly, this is nothing new: shastamugshots is another site, made by sad excuses for human beings who charge (convicted) people a sum to take their shot off the web and have ads for bail bonds on their page at the same time....
As an innocent you only have the chance to wait untill the charges are dismissed or pay them off. Nice blackmailing scheme! :nope:

[mookiemookie]

and that my friend is probably why the open attacks on his tactics.

No, the open attacks on him are because he makes a mockery of his office. He's a publicity hound. He does stupid stuff like this, and raiding an unarmed cockfighting suspect's home with Steven Seagal in a tank for a TV show. (http://www.kpho.com/news/27272012/detail.html) How many taxpayer dollars were spent bulldozing a house in order to confiscate some chickens and stroke Arpaio's ego?

This perverse neo-fascist obsession with his police state actions and "git dem bad guys!" as entertainment is disgusting. Arpaio is a pig in every sense of the word.

But if you want to know how I really feel about it, just ask. :lol:

[AVGWarhawk]

disgusting.


To whom? If it disgusting why is he continually elected back in?


perverse neo-fascist obsession


Who's obsession...thos neo-fascist! Really, who?


Arpaio is a pig in every sense of the word.


I'm guessing they like pork where he lives because he still holds the office...

[Freiwillige]

I voted for him and I'll vote again. :up:

[August]

One of the most appalling cases occurred in Maricopa County, Arizona, the home of Joe Arpaio, self-proclaimed "toughest sheriff in America." In 2004 one of Arpaio's SWAT teams conducted a bumbling raid in a Phoenix suburb. Among other weapons, it used tear gas and an armored personnel carrier that later rolled down the street and smashed into a car. The operation ended with the targeted home in flames and exactly one suspect in custody--for outstanding traffic violations. But for all that, the image that sticks in your head, as described by John Dougherty in the alternative weekly Phoenix New Times, is that of a puppy trying to escape the fire and a SWAT officer chasing him back into the burning building with puffs from a fire extinguisher. The dog burned to death.

The deputies were described as laughing at the dog's suffering (http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2004-08-05/news/dog-day-afternoon/full).http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2010/03/how_big_is_the.html

[Freiwillige]

Spin goes both ways.

http://www.davickservices.com/sheriff_arpaio_animal_shelter.htm

Your article comes from the phoenix new times, a free magazine that can only be described as the most openly pro illegal immigration, anti gun, anti Republican, Anti Conservative anti American and pro communist tripe. I pick that magazine up every time I see it! After all why waist free toilet paper?

[August]

Spin goes both ways.

http://www.davickservices.com/sheriff_arpaio_animal_shelter.htm

Your article comes from the phoenix new times, a free magazine that can only be described as the most openly pro illegal immigration, anti gun, anti Republican, Anti Conservative anti American and pro communist tripe. I pick that magazine up every time I see it! After all why waist free toilet paper?

Nice bit of hyperbole ya did there, but I didn't catch where you deny that it happened.

[Freiwillige]

I can neither confirm nor deny that it happened as I don't know and I wasn't there. I know his record on animal rights is stellar. I know the source of your argument is less than honest in its reporting. That is what I do know.

Now for the sake of argument lets say it did happen as reported and is fact.
What were the consequences? What were the circumstances?

I can show you a video of a Marine throwing a puppy off a cliff in Iraq, should he commandant of the Marine Corps be held accountable?

What if the dog was being aggressive? What if they were using the fire extinguisher to defend themselves from an unknown animal and it got scared by it and fled back into the fire? Pit bulls are seen as aggressive and unpredictable, what if it was a large pit? What if the Sheriffs who were reponsible for the botched opperation were fired? What if they went in on bad intel and supposed their were 300 armed spartan warriors inside ready to dig a pit and kick people in?

My point is that life has a lot of variables and its easy to spin any story these days. An officer shoots an aggressive pack of dogs attacking an elderly woman and next thing you know the stories out that somebody's loving cherished family pet was brutally murdered for helping the old lady across the street!

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

As it seems that some people are not worried about "innocent until otherwise proven" principle (correct me if I'm wrong) I think it's time to see if we find volunteers for following little experiment.

1. volunteer moves to area under responsibility of Maricopa County Sheriff's Office
2. we put on a word that that said person is for example (or something equally bad and as credible as possible) violent child molester, armed and dangerous.
3. we make sure press hear about this too
4. we make sure volunteers mugshot gets enough votes to get to frontpage
5. after our volunteer is found not guilty we see what he thinks about experience. Is it nice to have your face connected to child abuse or not?

Ofcourse this is likely illegal and therefore never happens.

[August]

I can show you a video of a Marine throwing a puppy off a cliff in Iraq, should he commandant of the Marine Corps be held accountable?

If he didn't do anything about it yes. Now IIRC the USMC prosecuted that young man. What did Arpaio do to those officers? Anything?

[mookiemookie]

I can neither confirm nor deny that it happened as I don't know and I wasn't there. I know his record on animal rights is stellar. I know the source of your argument is less than honest in its reporting. That is what I do know.

Now for the sake of argument lets say it did happen as reported and is fact.
What were the consequences? What were the circumstances?

I can show you a video of a Marine throwing a puppy off a cliff in Iraq, should he commandant of the Marine Corps be held accountable?

What if the dog was being aggressive? What if they were using the fire extinguisher to defend themselves from an unknown animal and it got scared by it and fled back into the fire? Pit bulls are seen as aggressive and unpredictable, what if it was a large pit? What if the Sheriffs who were reponsible for the botched opperation were fired? What if they went in on bad intel and supposed their were 300 armed spartan warriors inside ready to dig a pit and kick people in?

My point is that life has a lot of variables and its easy to spin any story these days. An officer shoots an aggressive pack of dogs attacking an elderly woman and next thing you know the stories out that somebody's loving cherished family pet was brutally murdered for helping the old lady across the street!

Strawman argument. While you split hairs about whether a 10 month old dog was a threat or not and poison the well of August's source, you ignore the mountain of other evidence that shows Arpaio is nothing more than a jack booted thug - using his office to intimidate his political enemies, violation of election laws, etc.


Sheriff Joe has a system that works. I have friends who have stayed in his tent city (DUI's) and they are determined that they are not going back. Love him or hate him his system works and many of his prior convictions are now his fans.

Except not so much. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maricopa_County_Sheriff%27s_Office_controversies#R ecidivism) "Comparing recidivism rates under Arpaio to those under his predecessor, the study found "there was no significant difference in recidivism observed between those offenders released in 1989-1990 and those released in 1994-1995." Personal experience is not scientific evidence.

[Freiwillige]

Okay looking further into the original story linked off of August's page I find this out.

Reason for arrest, Trafficking in stolen automatic firearms, not unpaid traffic ticket. Huge difference. It appears an already captured co conspirator sung like a Christmas goose. That explains the force!

House caught fire when tear gas was used, reason used...Guy fled into attic and refused to come out. Ummm suspected automatic stolen weapons=tear gas good and justifiable choice.

Armored car parking break failure led to it rolling into a parked vehicle.

[August]

Okay looking further into the original story linked off of August's page I find this out.

Reason for arrest, Trafficking in stolen automatic firearms, not unpaid traffic ticket. Huge difference. It appears an already captured co conspirator sung like a Christmas goose. That explains the force!

House caught fire when tear gas was used, reason used...Guy fled into attic and refused to come out. Ummm suspected automatic stolen weapons=tear gas good and justifiable choice.

Armored car parking break failure led to it rolling into a parked vehicle.

Link please.

[Freiwillige]

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2004-08-05/news/dog-day-afternoon/full

[Tribesman]

Freiwillige, the charges were traffic violations. great result for a big effort eh

It appears an already captured co conspirator sung like a Christmas goose.
If he was a co-conspirator then why is his other co conspirator released after being charged on unrelated traffic violations.
If he sung like a goose then where are the alledged weapons?

The neighbours have a point, if there was a real threat of a full scale gunbattle with automatic weapons in a residential district why were the showteam so unproffesional?
He didn't even work with the local police.:nope:

Freiwillige, it might be an idea if you want to show the sherrif as something other than a complete idiot if you provided links that don't actually show him as a complete idiot.

[August]

Okay looking further into the original story linked off of August's page I find this out.

Reason for arrest, Trafficking in stolen automatic firearms, not unpaid traffic ticket. Huge difference. It appears an already captured co conspirator sung like a Christmas goose. That explains the force!

That Kush guy was never charged for anything like that and the only weapons ever found in the case were a legally owned shotgun and pistol.

House caught fire when tear gas was used, reason used...Guy fled into attic and refused to come out. Ummm suspected automatic stolen weapons=tear gas good and justifiable choice.

Uhmm, from what I read the guy was never given a chance to refuse to come out. The sheriffs arrived, suited up and attacked.

Armored car parking break failure led to it rolling into a parked vehicle.

Any kid whose been to Drivers Education knows you both set the emergency brake and cut the wheels. I just see it as further evidence of incompetence and callous disregard for the public they're supposed to be protecting.

Bottom line here is you're defending a raid that was a miserable failure with a lot collateral damage and a serious act of animal cruelty.

Is this guy really worth the millions of dollars in damages the county has had to pay his victims and their survivors over the years? Is it really worth the lives of the people killed by his deputies?