Another weird news story from Florida

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:00 pm

Naked man eating another naked man's face is shot by police in Miami.

Sources: Miami Police Shoot, Kill Man Eating Another Man’s Face « CBS Miami

Post by **spot** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:12 pm

When the smoke clears I'll come back to this thread and comment on "Police sources say the man had virtually no face and was unrecognizable", how's that.

Every single time the police shoot someone dead in England the first thing the organization does is to lie about every aspect of the encounter, it's traditional. The advantage of this particular "Police sources say" is that it's eventually testable.

All that surprises me so far is the failure to claim the shootee was armed, or that he'd jumped a ticket barrier, or that the officers were in immediate fear for their lives.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:18 pm

That's a co-Incidence.... I have just been reading about a guy who cooked his own genitals and served It to guests.

Japanese man, 22, cooks his own genitals and serves them to paying dinner party guests | Mail Online

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:19 pm

spot;1394515 wrote:

All that surprises me so far is the failure to claim the shootee was armed, or that he'd jumped a ticket barrier, or that the officers were in immediate fear for their lives.

Because It's Miami not London.

Post by **spot** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:20 pm

oscar;1394517 wrote: Because It's Miami not London.

Ah. You feel I should also offer odds on whether the shootee was ethnically disadvantaged. I'll go along with that.

Post by **spot** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:26 pm

Rome's legions used to be cleansed of disgrace by putting to death, on parade, one in every ten of its enlisted complement. I commend the approach to Florida's city police managers. There was even a word for it back then, it happened so often.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:32 pm

Should've been the officers.

Post by **spot** » Sun May 27, 2012 1:59 pm

SnoozeAgain;1394521 wrote: Should've been the officers.Didn't we once have an age-retired secretarial assistant with a fetish for dressing in fancy-dress police trousers and brandishing a Fisher-Price imitation sidearm? It's years since she came to mind. She was from Florida if I recall.

And are you never even slightly upset at the tone of US news reports? Where's the outrage? How can the reporters possibly think it's a humor story? Why do they not start out from the position that the matter needs impartial investigation with a view to reining in slap-happy gunmen in uniform?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun May 27, 2012 2:20 pm

I have to ask for the record, what actions would Spot take if confronted by a man in an uncontrollable state gnawing at the face of another man ?

Post by **spot** » Sun May 27, 2012 2:22 pm

Bruv;1394525 wrote: I have to ask for the record, what actions would Spot take if confronted by a man in an uncontrollable state gnawing at the face of another man ?

Rather obviously I would render the attacker unconscious with a blow.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun May 27, 2012 2:32 pm

spot;1394526 wrote: Rather obviously I would render the attacker unconscious with a blow.

Obviously the man for the job, are you standing for Police Commissioner ?

Have you read this Blog ?

Slipping into Spot speak, I commend it to you. Best to enter with an open unbiased mindset though.....if you can.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Sun May 27, 2012 2:32 pm

spot;1394523 wrote: Didn't we once have an age-retired secretarial assistant with a fetish for dressing in fancy-dress police trousers and brandishing a Fisher-Price imitation sidearm? It's years since she came to mind. She was from Florida if I recall.

And are you never even slightly upset at the tone of US news reports? Where's the outrage? How can the reporters possibly think it's a humor story? Why do they not start out from the position that the matter needs impartial investigation with a view to reining in slap-happy gunmen in uniform?

Not police officers, I was referring to your charming anecdote about Roman enlisted being culled and I said "should have been the officers."

I think you misunderstood this story, the police didn't shoot the man that was having his face gnawed off, the one that you intimated the police were lying about to justify the shooting. Or are you suggesting that the police chewed the man's face themselves to justify the shooting of the other man?

Post by **spot** » Sun May 27, 2012 3:27 pm

SnoozeAgain;1394529 wrote: I think you misunderstood this story, the police didn't shoot the man that was having his face gnawed off, the one that you intimated the police were lying about to justify the shooting. Or are you suggesting that the police chewed the man's face themselves to justify the shooting of the other man?I'm saying I'll post a photo of the chap who survived to give the lie to "the man had virtually no face". I doubt I'm wrong in guessing it's an utter lie of the typical post-killing police sort. We can also await the further blackening - is "blackening" an acceptable word these days? - of the reputation of the one who's dead.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Mon May 28, 2012 5:03 pm

A civilian witness alerted a police officer to the incident. I don't see how the cops can be blamed for being trigger happy in this instance.

MIAMI (AP) — A witness says a naked man chewing on the face of another naked man on a downtown highway ramp kept eating and growled at a police officer who fatally shot him to make him stop.

Larry Vega told WSVN-TV in Miami (WSVN-TV - New details emerge in causeway police involved shooting) that he was riding his bicycle Saturday afternoon off the MacArthur Causeway that connects downtown Miami with Miami Beach when he saw the savage attack on the bridge's off-ramp.

"The guy was, like, tearing him to pieces with his mouth, so I told him, 'Get off!'" Vega said. "The guy just kept eating the other guy away, like, ripping his skin."

The slain man was identified by the Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner's office as Rudy Eugene, 31, Miami television station WFOR (Causeway Cannibal Identified; Fears Grow Over Drug Possibly Involved « CBS Miami) reported.

Vega flagged down a Miami police officer, who he said repeatedly ordered the attacker to get off the victim. The attacker just picked his head up and growled at the officer, Vega said.

As the attack continued, Vega said the officer shot the attacker, who continued chewing the victim's face. The officer fired again, killing the attacker.

Miami police have released few details about the attack, other than confirming that there was a fatal officer-involved shooting. The name of the victim, who was taken to Jackson Memorial Hospital, had not been immediately determined by authorities, said Detective William Moreno. Messages left Monday for a police spokesman were not immediately returned.

A spokeswoman said Monday that the hospital would not be releasing any information about him.

A surveillance video camera from The Miami Herald building nearby captured images of the men's naked legs lying side by side after the shooting.

Vega said the victim appeared gravely injured.

"It was just a blob of blood," Vega said. "You couldn't really see, it was just blood all over the place."

Witness says naked attacker was chewing man's face - Yahoo! News

Post by **spot** » Mon May 28, 2012 5:06 pm

SnoozeAgain;1394579 wrote: I don't see how the cops can be blamed for being trigger happy in this instance.That merely highlights your nationality: the only good perp is a dead perp.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Mon May 28, 2012 5:23 pm

Yeah, I like to generalize like that as often as possible. Woman gets stopped for running a stop sign? Shoot her. Naked guy eating a man's face, growls at the cop when ordered to stop, keeps eating. Shoot him.

Exactly the same thing.

Post by **spot** » Mon May 28, 2012 5:39 pm

Damn right it is. What, other than the grotesque nature of the allegation, would you suggest is a reason for killing him instead of stopping him?

Post by **spot** » Mon May 28, 2012 6:00 pm

Have these walking cyborgs abandoned their nightsticks, for example? Do they no longer carry handcuffs? I don't think I've ever seen an on-duty constable in England without either. Do your walking cyborgs not train in how to use them effectively?

The guy who was gunned to death wasn't even stood up, for goodness' sake.

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon May 28, 2012 10:59 pm

Well, I woulda shot him, too.

Give the guy a break, He was probably watching a zombie movie the night before.

Post by **spot** » Tue May 29, 2012 12:22 am

Or, if there was a fight, it could just have been a fight. The lurid descriptions could as easily be applied to that between Dan Dority and Captain Turner until these power-crazed clowns with the gun decided it was their place to mete out summary justice. As for the nudity who knows, though that's the only bit of the story I give credence to.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue May 29, 2012 3:22 pm

spot;1394531 wrote: I'm saying I'll post a photo of the chap who survived to give the lie to "the man had virtually no face". I doubt I'm wrong in guessing it's an utter lie of the typical post-killing police sort. We can also await the further blackening - is "blackening" and acceptable word these days? - of the reputation of the one who's dead.
As for the nudity who knows, though that's the only bit of the story I give credence to.

Graphic link 1

Graphic link 2

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue May 29, 2012 4:05 pm

Bruv;1394656 wrote: Graphic link 1

Graphic link 2

Much of his face had been ripped away It says.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Tue May 29, 2012 5:13 pm

oscar;1394664 wrote: Much of his face had been ripped away It says.

I'm sure the cop did it. With his gun. Because he's a racist.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue May 29, 2012 5:21 pm

SnoozeAgain;1394668 wrote: I'm sure the cop did it. With his gun. Because he's a racist.

Of course. Silly me. What was I thinking ?

Post by **spot** » Tue May 29, 2012 6:54 pm

The question I'd like to put to the thread, while we wait for events to unfold, is whether the police have a duty of care to someone part-way through an out-of-control drug trip.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue May 29, 2012 8:30 pm

Nope

I know that if I came across some clown playing Zombie, I am NOT gonna go up and look at their pupils to see if perhaps they are tripping. I'n gonna off the sob.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 30, 2012 2:50 am

Do you know what? Unlikely though it is at first sight, this *is* a purely American response, both on the boards and on the streets.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed May 30, 2012 3:58 am

spot;1394672 wrote: The question I'd like to put to the thread, while we wait for events to unfold, is whether the police have a duty of care to someone part-way through an out-of-control drug trip.

Of course the police have a duty of care for drug trippers and aggressive drunks.

They also have a greater knowledge and insight into everyday interaction with suchlike, so we must to some extent bow to their experience.

They also have a duty of care to protect the public, and the human need to protect themselves, it is not always a simple call.

I have no experience of dealing with drug crazed people, the police do.

There have been incidents where some nutter has had to be shot several times just to stop them trying to rip anyone in their vicinities head off, tazers and single shots being ineffective.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:02 am

For what it's worth, I've never been rendered unconscious from being blown. Has anyone else?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:09 am

Ahso!;1394688 wrote: For what it's worth, I've never been rendered unconscious from being blown. Has anyone else?

Better you complain to the blowee ?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:26 am

Bruv;1394690 wrote: Better you complain to the blowee ?What makes you think I'm complaining? Incidentally, wouldn't it be the blower I'd complain to? I'm the blowee aren't I?

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:32 am

Bruv;1394687 wrote: Of course the police have a duty of care for drug trippers and aggressive drunks.

They also have a greater knowledge and insight into everyday interaction with suchlike, so we must to some extent bow to their experience.

They also have a duty of care to protect the public, and the human need to protect themselves, it is not always a simple call.

I have no experience of dealing with drug crazed people, the police do.

There have been incidents where some nutter has had to be shot several times just to stop them trying to rip anyone in their vicinities head off, tazers and single shots being ineffective.

Well, I have had experience dealing with drug-whackos. They can far more dangerous than you can imagine.

Perhaps the cop was a tad hasty with his gun, but I an not sure that in this case it was that much of an overreaction.

This is not something a cop, or anyone else has often had to deal with.

When the cop ordered him to stop, he growled at him.

I bet that cop never wants to watch another zombie flick.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:36 am

LarsMac;1394706 wrote: I bet that cop never wants to watch another zombie flick.Were he to serve a life sentence for whatever you'd call avoidable homicide over there, one would hope he'd not get the opportunity.

Ah. I'm forgetting. He's untouchable, he's a cop.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:42 am

spot;1394707 wrote: Were he to serve a life sentence for whatever you'd call avoidable homicide over there, one would hope he'd not get the opportunity.

Ah. I'm forgetting. He's untouchable, he's a cop. How exactly would you suggest the cop dealt with the situation given what we know?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:45 am

What's the purpose of teaching these bullies, I mean cops, to do MMA fighting if they never use it? This appears to be the perfect opportunity to go Rodney King on someone without taking much heat for it.

I think the cop watches too much True Blood.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:47 am

Ahso!;1394709 wrote: What's the purpose of teaching these bullies, I mean cops, to do MMA fighting if they never use it? This appears to be the perfect opportunity to go Rodney King on someone without taking much heat for it.

I think the cop watches too much True Blood. Have you ever served In the police force?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:47 am

oscar;1394708 wrote: How exactly would you suggest the cop dealt with the situation given what we know?Already asked and answered.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:48 am

oscar;1394710 wrote: Have you ever served In the police force?No! But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:51 am

oscar;1394710 wrote: Have you ever served In the police force?Excuse me but I've always wanted to say the following: "I AM THE PHUCKING SHORE PATROL!"

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:52 am

Ahso!;1394711 wrote: Already asked and answered.I wasn't asking you

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:54 am

oscar;1394715 wrote: i wasn't asking youtuff sh!t!!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:54 am

Ahso!;1394712 wrote: No! But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

So you've never served In the police force yet you feel you know exactly what should be done In the situations they find themselves In ?

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed May 30, 2012 6:58 am

Incorrect. Cops are held accountable. Well, this IS Miami, though, so, we'll see.

When a cop encounters someone doing bodily harm to another, the primary task is to stop harmful activity.

This person was obviously doing harm and was showing no inclination to stop.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 30, 2012 7:05 am

oscar;1394708 wrote: How exactly would you suggest the cop dealt with the situation given what we know?Let's see now. What is it that we know. We know there was a fight involving one (not, as reported, two) naked men. We know one of them was shot more than once by a police officer, and the shot man is dead. We know the names and ages of the two men.

Beyond that, I've seen a lot of blatant one-sided excuse-making propaganda of exactly the sort we invariably hear when Leman Street's finest have killed someone in circumstances where they could have chosen to modify the circumstances and thereby merely make an arrest. Let's wait for the survivor to give a news conference, shall we, before deciding what bits of that morass to include as "what we know". We knew, for example, that Jean Charles de Menezes fled when police closed in on him, vaulting a ticket barrier long before he was shot. Which bits of "what we know" fall into the same category of knowing, otherwise known as deliberate flagrant lying in a short-term attempt to excuse the actions of the police.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 30, 2012 7:07 am

LarsMac;1394719 wrote: Incorrect. Cops are held accountable. Well, this IS Miami, though, so, we'll see.

When a cop encounters someone doing bodily harm to another, the primary task is to stop harmful activity.

This person was obviously doing harm and was showing no inclination to stop.
And your police have stopped carrying night-sticks and handcuffs?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 30, 2012 7:15 am

spot;1394723 wrote: And your police have stopped carrying night-sticks and handcuffs? I would have guessed that If the article stated the man had most of his face ripped off and given the graphic pictures, the victem was In a serious condition. Surely, the preservation of the victems life was paramount?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 30, 2012 7:16 am

Ahso!;1394717 wrote: tuff sh!t!!

Yes, that's really grown up In a debate on policing.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 30, 2012 7:22 am

oscar;1394728 wrote: I would have guessed that If the article stated the man had most of his face ripped off and given the graphic pictures, the victem was In a serious condition. Surely, the preservation of the victems life was paramount?

You're making an assumption as regards who attacked whom. Preserving the life of anyone whose life is in immediate jeopardy is paramount, yes. As to whether anyone's was, what was it I suggested? ...Let's wait for the survivor to give a news conference, shall we, before deciding what bits of that morass to include as "what we know".Would you like to go round the circle again, oscar? Or have we both said what we intended to say.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 30, 2012 7:33 am

spot;1394732 wrote: You're making an assumption as regards who attacked whom. Preserving the life of anyone whose life is in immediate jeopardy is paramount, yes. As to whether anyone's was, what was it I suggested? ...Let's wait for the survivor to give a news conference, shall we, before deciding what bits of that morass to include as "what we know".Would you like to go round the circle again, oscar? Or have we both said what we intended to say.

"

Let's wait for the survivor to give a news conference, shall we, before deciding what bits of that morass to include as "what we know". Is a get out .

We know by the pictures that the victem was In a serious condition. Preserving his life and getting him medical treatment asap I'm pretty sure would have been paramount to the cops Involved.

What does It matter who started It ? That's a ridiculous statement to make. The man needed medical treatment. What do you suggest? That they conduct a roadside Interview booth to establish who started It before getting the man medical aid ?

Post by **spot** » Wed May 30, 2012 7:37 am

oscar;1394735 wrote: What does It matter who started It ? That's a ridiculous statement to make. The man needed medical treatment. What do you suggest? That they conduct a roadside Interview booth to establish who started It before getting the man medical aid ?It doesn't matter in the least who started it. I was objecting to your emotive word "victim", which is an assumption.