Evidence shows not that the cop was grabbed but that he assaulted the kid. That is the only current evidence and is to be taken as the only concrete evidence. It would vertainly be in the best interest of the cop to lie.

acc. to last night's news
1. the videotaper was arrested for petty theft, hit-and-run, and one other thing.... i forget what it was, but it was a petty crime
2. for the ppl demanding proof, for like the past 5 days they've been showing the tape on the news so.... suffice it to say there's proof
3. the 16-year-old that was beaten (punched, slammed on car roof, etc.) is said to be mentally disabled
4. yesterday in inglewood 300+ people (both black and white) held a protest in front of inglewood police dept., demanding that officer morise be suspended w/o pay, if not fired completely (he's currently on paid leave). a leader of the protest said it was "not a black or white thing, but a right or wrong thing."
5. the assaulting officer (morise) claims that the 16-year-old grabbed him in the groin [after being slammed on the hood], and that is why he punched him
6. another [black] man (i think in his thirties) is claiming that he was also beaten by officer morise on june 23rd

Thats right marine, jefferson, one of the best 'politicians' in the history of the nation would be executed under current laws, george washington would not be executed, but he would get life for his hemp farms. Abraham Lincoln smoked hemp and even did an ad for Hohner Harmonicas stating that "There is nothing I enjoy more than sitting out on my porch playing my Hohner harmonica and enjoying a pipe of sweet hemp"

Until you can disprove those facts, please refrain from opening your yapper.

I might stop arguing with oyu now that I've realized that you're just an ultra liberal demonstrating the farce of the far right.

"Locus compared Thomas Jefferson to a criminal. So Locus and Aloner, find me proof that Jeffereson was a criminal."


He would be, if he lived in today's world . . . what he did was not illegal in his time, so therefor he was not a criminal, but, if he were alive today, and cultivated hemp plants, he would be a criminal . . . would you discredit him because of some silly plants?

once the boy was in hand cuffs slamming him down and hitting him then became way wrong.

I would like someone to provide me with a link to the tape that shows what the boy did before the cops beat him. If no such link exsists then we can not say the police officers were wrong until a court of law deterimines it.

Locus compared Thomas Jefferson to a criminal. So Locus and Aloner, find me proof that Jeffereson was a criminal. You are obviously implying he is a criminal. I would like to know his record. His crimes and punishments will be sufficent. If you can not find them, then drop your pathetic arguements.

"Please provide me with legal documents that say Thomas Jefferson was a drug Kingpin."


Umm . . . he said "UNDER TODAY'S LAWS" . . .


And, marijuana wasn't outlawed in the United States until 1937.

Thomas Jefferson cultivated hemp, which is now illegal in the United States. There would be no legal documents . . . because, well, it wasn't outlawed for over 100 years after his death!

Study history, mon.

A criminal is not credible. To say otherwise is simply ignorant. Please provide me with legal documents that say Thomas Jefferson was a drug Kingpin. Findc me proof that the police even questioned him about it. Once you do that, then I will validate your arguement. Also, bringing, once again, irreleventaly bringing up marijuana simply radiats your immaturity.

I never said that you had said that, but that quote certainly applies to your selective hearing.

As for the fact that the man was a criminal, it doesnt mean that he is not credible, Thomas Jefferson would be execut4ed under current laws for being a drug kingpin, as he grew millions of hemp plants, yet he is not discredited on that merit.

Locus never atribute a quoute to me that I did not make. Once again you are a jackal. Quote me when I say I will only listen to what I like. If not shut up.

Sorry---Mitchell Crooks, the videotape guy, was convicted of petty theft, driving under the influence and hit and run. He didn't show up for his sentence (March '99) and has had a warrant for his arrest ever since...

I agree that the tape is important...I'm just questioning this guys motives...

Acc. to CNN, Crooks has been hanging out (even sleeping) at a television studio all week doing interviews and shows on the radio.

Check out this article: http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/07/12/police.beating.crooks/index.html

"I will only listen if I like what I'm hearing"

Your selective deafness in your attempts to convey you are correct show nothing more than that your arguments can easily be disproven and that you refuse to adress debunkers, preffering to argue with people who have almost the same viewpoint as yourself. How presumptous.

Kilo, as a personal friend, I am sorry I offended you. However, with King, we did not see the whole story. Did the cops take it too far? Yes. However, what we think is irrelevant because a court of law proves us wrong. I am not defending them, Kilo, I am just presenting the facts. As for the jury, that is a speculation you make, I would speculate that they were un bias. I am sorry to offended someone like you. I was defending no one, I am presenting the facts. As for everyone elses irrelevant opinions, I will not respond to them. I will only respond to what Kilo has to say. If you have something to say to me, e-mail it to Kilo and maybe he will convey it to me.

Marine,. the video evidence show the teen being beaten, not the teen beating, therefore the current conclusion based on the evidence is that the teen was beaen. If you can show othersie, please provide proof.

What were the man's warrants out for ? And videotaping police beatings is always a good service, much better than the normal media whining about celebrity divorces and teeling us to ban civillina ownership of firearms.

Have you guys seen what's going on with the guy who taped the beating?

He had an outstanding warrant for his arrest from some incidents a couple years ago.

Apparently, this guy was paranoid about the cops beating him up and was screaming, “help, help,” when police arrested him. Later he went to the hospital because he said they roughed him up, even though there was no visible evidence of such.

Now, some people are talking about him as if he is a hero of justice and plan to help raise his bail money. Is this guy really a hero or was he just at the right/wrong place at the right/wrong time?

Also, do you think this guy really cared about supplying justice or is he just another media vulture?

Youngqueen-
I did see the cop put his hand in front of the cop in question face. I did see that the teen seemed as if he was exausted. Thanx for replying.
-Quaji21

Quaji21, I also saw the black cop. There was also another cop who put his hand in front of the cop who punched the teen; to stop him from hitting him again. But did any of you notice how the teen was already delirious? He didn't even fight back on the tape.

Right On Kilo

Marine, I see your point about not seeing the whole story. It's a good point. It's wrong for us to speculate about what actually happened. But for you to defend the cops who beat Rodney King is pretty messed (I got a better word for that) up. Sure, let's say Mr. King tried to beat the crap out of cops. Is that any reason for a dozen or so cops to beat the hell out of him? No. And about that jury...they were racist Marine. That's obvious. How can you justify what those cops did Marine? That's absurd. It's pretty disappointing to hear someone that I know is a lot smarter than that make excuses for blatant racism.