Cops choke a man to death for drugs in his mouth July 11 2009

[Joanne98]

Run time: 08:19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SoBn86IPTE   Posted on YouTube: July 11, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: July 12, 2009 By DU Member: Joanne98 Views on DU: 5503

 

RACISTWORLD
July 11, 2009

http://www.zededge.org/488
Authorities in Livingston Parish, Louisiana say a deputy acted appropriately in trying to arrest a man at a traffic stop who died while in custody.
Dash cam video of deadly traffic stop released
Updated: July 10, 2009 07:21 AM


By Tyana Williams

LIVINGSTON, LA (WAFB) - The Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office has released the dash cam video of a deadly traffic stop and in doing so said its deputies followed procedure.

The video shows Deputy Chris Sturdivant as he pulls over 42-year-old Adam Stogner. The tape starts with the deputy asking Stogner for his license. It ends with an officer asking the man if he's still breathing.

Chief Deputy Jason Ard says when the video starts Adam Stogner did not put his truck in park. They say that backs up the reason he was pulled over. The deputy believed he was impaired. On the tape, there is audio of the deputy asking for Stogner's license. "What you got in your hand? the deputy then asks. "Give me your hand," he demands. "I don't have nothing in my hand," Stogner responds. "I swear to you."

The media watched the video with Ard and several other law enforcement agents. "Pay attention to the subject's right hand," Ard said. On the dash cam video, the deputy tells Stogner to open his hand. Deputies say they believe Stogner was holding a baggy of narcotics in his right hand. The tape shows Stogner moving something from one hand to the other and placing it in his mouth. "Did you see him put it in his mouth? Ard asks. "Right there and this is where the struggle starts," he points out. "Spit it out!" the deputy tells Stogner.

All this is happening while the deputy was trying to handcuff the man. The deputy does get one cuff on, but because the two seem to be in a wrestling match, Ard says that loose cuff can be a weapon. At several points, there are images of what looks like the deputy hitting Stogner. The sheriff's office says another time it looks like Stogner is crawling toward the interstate with the deputy on his back. And again, it appears the deputy hits the man.

"He was appropriate in his actions. He followed departmental protocol in trying to arrest a subject who tried to resist," Ard said. Only after two more deputies arrive on scene is Stogner completely cuffed. Keep in mind, the baggy is still in his mouth. It's then that one of the deputies notices Stogner is having trouble breathing and calls for medical help. "Is he breathing?" one of the deputies asked. "I don't know," another answered.

Deputies say Stogner later died along Interstate 12. Deputies did start CPR until EMS arrived. Peter John, the family's lawyer, says only one thing is clear from the tape. He says Adam Stogner never tried to hit the deputy. "Adam got his butt beat, okay, 'cause he's all bruised up and dead," John said. "Is that justified by what the officer wanted out of his hand?"

Stogner's family's attorney says the family plans to conduct its own autopsy and investigation. Preliminary results from the Livingston Parish coroner show Stogner died from severe coronary artery disease, an enlarged heart, and a fracture of the hyoid bone in his neck. Dr. Ron Coe says the fracture may be due to force being applied to that area. Dr. Coe says Stogner also tested positive for methamphetamine. The coroner also said the death was accidental. Louisiana State Police have been called in to assist the sheriff's office in investigating this case.

[izquierdista]

1. Fractured hyoid?

In every single forensic show I have seen where there was a fractured hyoid, the death was a murder. No maybe about it, "Dr." Coe.

[MercutioATC]

2. That's because a fractured hyoid is strong evidence that force was applied to the throat.

...so it's used to prove strangulation/throttling.

I don't think we have any doubt that there was some throttling going on here, but that doesn't make this a "murder".

[izquierdista]

3. Excuse me

Homicide. Murder has intent involved with it. Death at the hands of another is "homicide".

[MercutioATC]

4. But there are affirmative defenses to homicide (like being a LEO restraining a combative suspect)

I don't think any prosecutor would find grounds for homicide charges (or manslaughter charges).

[fascisthunter]

16. how much force is necessary to fracture a hyoid?

[izquierdista]

23. Not really how much, but where

Since it is the only bone in the body that "floats", enough force to break it is enough force to close the windpipe and choke someone.

[MercutioATC]

24. When a 250+-pound guy thrashes around? Who knows?

This wasn't an old lady being strangled in her sleep.

The force wasn't solely (or necessarily even mostly) the Deputy's hold...a lot of it would be the force of a large man throwing his weight into resisting that hold.

[Cronus Protagonist]

5. Where's the toxicology report on the murderer?

How come they don't test the police?

[izquierdista]

7. Testosterone and adrenaline?

Unfortunately, one metabolizes quickly and the other is so elevated in overbearing authority figures it would hard to tell what an overdose is.

[npk]

20. Most PD's do test

Any officer in the state of Georgia who is involved in an incident where a subject dies, that primary officer is sent to the hospital to check for drugs and alcohol. Not sure about the state of Louisiana, but I would assume this is true in most if not all states.

[MercutioATC]

6. See what happens when law enforcement DOESN'T use tasers?

The "authorities" are right on this.

Stogner refused to comply with a reasonable, legal instruction and became combative. Sturdivant was in compliance with procedures...procedures that exist not to "preserve evidence" but to prevent a suspect from overdosing by ingesting a large amount of drugs.

It's an unfortunate situation, but I don't see wrongdoing by the Deputy.

[winyanstaz]

8. oh bullshit....

A person's life is NOT worth a handful of illegal drugs...I don't care what planet your from and I don't give a shit what your LAWS say.
People were murdered for drinking out of the wrong drinking fountain or looking at a white woman the wrong way because of laws. A bad law does not make a cop playing judge, jury and executioner right.
Tazers kill just as well..just ask the families of the hundreds already dead.

[TheEuclideanOne]

10. I call "Bullshit" on your "Bullshit"

The guy was a big guy and was not cooperative. He was definitely being combative and the cop seemed like he was trying to force the guy to comply to a request to give him the drugs. I don't believe that the cop said to himself, "Laws be damned, the guy deserved to die for having drugs". It appeared to me to be a pretty big, strong guy, who was trying to avoid getting busted for possession.

Regarding your comments, they seem a bit melodramatic if you ask me. Sure, there are plenty of unjust laws and there have been for many years. This was not a case of a cop enforcing an unfair law, he was simply trying to do his job. If I were pulled over and had some drug in my hand and the copy asked me to hand it over, would the police officer be wrong for asking or would I be wrong for refusing to hand it over? This situation is a far cry from a black man getting murdered for looking at a white woman, so get off of your soapbox. Geez, save that stance for something other than a guy resisting arrest for a drug possession.

In my opinion, it was sad that somebody had to die, but the guy does have some responsibility in this.

[mkultra]

37. resisting arrest does not justify excessive force

death is almost always an indicator of excessive force.

[winyanstaz]

55. no one HAD to die...

A lot of the people DEAD from tazers already..also should not have been murdered.
You may except killing people, I do not.

[droidamus2]

9. Of course

The one perfect way to keep a suspect from ODing is the kill the SOB so at least he doesn't die from ingesting drugs.

[MercutioATC]

18. You could say the same of a surgeon who loses a patient on the operating table.

He did what he was trained to do, but complications (in this case, the suspect's continued physical resistance) resulted in the person's death.

[mkultra]

36. a patient consents to the procedure and thus the risk

If a LEO goes to far in the use of force, it becomes a legal issue.

[mkultra]

12. right. that was to preserve evidence

no one chokes to save a life.

[MercutioATC]

15. You're 100% wrong.

...and I'd just LOVE to see how loud you'd squawk if the Deputy had done nothing and the guy had died of an overdose.

LEOs are trained to do this because suspects were eating potential evidence and dying. The attempt to stop this from happening, combined with a large suspect offering physical resistance, unfortunately resulted in the suspect's death...but the procedure was valid.

[mkultra]

30. well, i dont know procedure

but it sure seems like common sense has failed to prevail here in many ways. If a suspect does overdose, i would imagine that killing him will not help. I would also imagine that if this is truly procedure, then officers are probably trained in proper techniques to prevent things like, oh i don't know, broken necks.


I bet you $20 bucks that this officer stepped way outside authorized procedures when he was riding the suspect choking him with the handcuffs. What do you think?

Ill double down and bet that at some point, it would be more logical to call EMT and let them take him in for a stomach pump.


If this cop really did follow procedure, then cops are dumber than i thought. I seriously doubt it though.
Yup, i would squawk if he stood around and let him die. Killing him is not better though.

[MercutioATC]

34. I made the same offer to "safeinOhio" ..restrain a 250+ pound combative man and then talk to me.

1) This Deputy pulled over an impaired driver.

2) When he tried to take the driver into custody, the driver concealed something in his hand. The Deputy asked the driver to open his hand, and he refused...he even said that he "swore" there was nothing in his hand...but still refused to open it. This is an immediate safety issue...both for the Deputy and the driver. The driver could be concealing anything...drugs, a weapon...

3) The driver put whatever was in his hand into his mouth and resisted arrest. This, combined with the reason for the traffic stop, suggested that the driver had been concealing drugs.

4) The Deputy then had to both deal with a combative subject resisting arrest AND the possibility that this subject has ingested drugs that he was trying to conceal be eating them...which could result in an overdose. The logical course of action (which also conforms to training) was to attempt to take the subject into custody while attempting to get him to spit out the drugs.

5) The subject refused to spit out the drugs and continued to resist arrest.


Unfortunately, the subject died....but the Deputy's course of action was still not only justified, ot was the only responsible course of action he could have taken.


It's easy to sit on your couch and type criticism. Try putting yourself in that position and ask yourself what you would have done differently.

[mkultra]

35. The suspect was still alive when the second deputy arrived

which essentially makes the justification false. It was clear at that point that the suspect had lost his will to fight yet the choking continued.

Sorry, I'm not biting and i think your explanations are bullshit. There was no cause to use deadly force. At the end of the day, that is all that matters.

FYI, its just as easy to sit on your couch and make excuses.


What would i have done differently. Pretty simple. Since the suspect was still alive when the second deputy showed up. I would have immediately finished the cuffing. Here is where i would act differently. I would then stop choking him and instruct him to spit the drugs out. I would also call an ambulance just in case he did swallow.

As far as im concerned, this was excessive force. I guarantee you that the jury will see it that way too. This policy has been abused but other officers before and frankly i hope it comes to an end. No cop should ever kill someone over evidence.

[TheEuclideanOne]

53. Really? That is what you would have done differently?

You would stop choking him and instruct him to spit the drugs out? Just curious... You are not on drugs right now because if I was high, that might seem like a good solution. Back on planet earth, I think that it is pretty safe to say that the cop was telling the guy to spit the drugs out. In fact, that was the whole point of the struggle. There is a video at the very top of this thread that you should watch. If you watch it, it should clear the whole thing up for you. The guy did not want to spit out the drugs, not matter how nicely the cop asked.

I hate to be dwelling on the same point here, but your solution really is to just ask the guy to spit out the drugs? Really?!?!? Okay, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you actually did watch the video. Were you shouting at the screen saying "Just ask him to spit it out! Just ask him! Say please if he continues to resist. Just Ask!!!!"? I bet you were.

Not only was this a 250+ pound man who obviously did not have any intention of spitting the drugs out because he did not want to go to jail and also because he probably wanted to do them really bad. I am also assuming that the guy was frickin high and feeling no pain on meth. Think about it, he came out of the car with the bag of Meth in his hand. If you are wondering about Meth, try googling "Meth Mouth" and look at some of the pretty pictures.

Last but not least, I have a small pekinese dog that ways 25 pounds. Sometimes he grabs a chicken bone off the dinner table when nobody is watching, which may kill him if he chews it up. I challenge you to get the chicken from his mouth. You risk losing a finger each time and would not attempt it if it wasn't a matter of saving his life. Now compare that to a 250+ meth addict. Try to get the baggie from his mouth!!! BTW, I will try to just ask my dog to spit out the bone the next time.

[Fedja]

44. Seriously...

None of what you wrote above makes "choking" necessary. Choking the man to death was the cop's decision, not protocol.

[suzanner]

11. case for police stupidity

-even if he put something in his mouth, all they had to do was tape over the mouth, haul the guy in. Two officers can do better than this. I mean is low IQ part of the job description? Especially for the trainers who figure this 'brute force first' routine is good for officers or suspects.

[MercutioATC]

19. Talk about "low IQ"...you're lowering the bar, here.

"Tape over the mouth"????

Yeah, that would be a GREAT way to stop somebody from swallowing drugs and overdosing...

:eyes:

[scarface2004]

13. so he had drugs...big fucking deal!!!

the 'war on drugs' is bullshit...and so are these yahoo crackers in uniforms!!

[MercutioATC]

17. The issue was that he ATE the drugs.

The departments I've worked for trained their officers to take all necessary measures to prevent a suspect from disposing of drugs by eating them...not because the evidence would be lost, but because plenty of idiots have overdosed and died.

[safeinOhio]

25. Necessary measures?

Less likely to die from an overdose if EMT are rolling and can be there within 1/2 hour. With 2 officers there, it would only require pinching the nose to cause the mouth to open and the bag to fall out. I call poor training and over reaction. May not be criminal, but, civil trial with a jury will depend on the family's lawyer's skill.

[MercutioATC]

31. Deal with a 250+ pound man who is resisting arrest and then talk to me.

I'm not disputing your assertions, but I think you're demanding an unrealistic standard.

[mkultra]

38. once the second deputy arrived, the suspect was alive and fully cuffed

choking at that point was excessive. I don't have to be a disabled to identify a quadriplegic and i don't have to be a cop to know excessive force when i see it.

[Cali_Democrat]

26. And then the cops ended up killing him anyways

:eyes:

[MercutioATC]

32. Just as a surgeon will sometimes kill a patient they are trying to save, yes.

I think we will agree that the Deputy's goal was not to kill this person.

We can probably also agree that no amount of training will result in a favorable resolution 100% of the time.


There's no denying that this was a bad outcome, but the actions taken by the Deputy were done for good reason and if there is blame to be assigned, at least the majority of it must be assigned to the 250+ pound man who had drugs, attempted to conceal those drugs by eating them, and resisted both arrest and attempts to remove those drugs from his mouth so he didn't overdose.

[mkultra]

39. There is a high probablity he would have survived

if EMT was called.

[jhrobbins]

41. Well, I guess the case could be made for there to be an assessment

of blame for both of the 'actors'. Maybe even the majority of it as you suggest. I do think that the man's death is more than enough compensation for his actions. Now what about the deputy-what should be his penalty for his part?

[Fedja]

45. See?

Sure, preventing the guy from eating the dope makes sense. But he ate it. Past tense.

Breaking his arm to prevent an OD? Sort of makes sense. Choking him after he eats the drugs? Less so much.

[snake in the grass]

50. So, he had to kill the man...

...to save the man. Alles klar!

[fascisthunter]

14. serve and protect

who the hell was being protected here.

[bc3000]

27. They were serving him

If they had successfully subdued him and been able to remove the guy's meth stash from his mouth, he might be alive.

[Fedja]

46. Also

If they didn't choke him to death he might be alive.

[Seldona]

21. So police can kill for just about any reason? A few bucks worth of drugs?

Noted.

I didn't think I would find such support of these Gestapo tactics here though.

[MercutioATC]

29. Do you know what happens when somebody eats a baggie of drugs (like Stogner did)? They die.

Depending on what it is, a single small baggie can kill somebody...and most people who are stupid enough to attempt to "destroy the evidence" this way are also stupid enough not to realize it.


It's procedure to use any means necessary to get a suspect to spit out the drugs in situations like this because a lot of people have died.

This incident had an unfortunate end, but the police didn't "kill for just about any reason" or for "a few bucks worth of drugs". They restrained a combative person and tried to stop him from ingesting what may have been a fatal dose of drugs. Unfortunately, his resistance resulted in his death.

[mkultra]

40. or the go to the hospital and get thier stomach pumped.

[Fedja]

47. Many eat a bag of drugs

And sit on an airplane with it in their stomach for 12 hours. Also, many OD and get saved at the hospital.

His choking resulted in his death. :P His resistance resulted in bruising.

[bertman]

22. My itchy little trigger finger is hovering over UNrecommend, because of all the lame-ass

accusations of murder by several posters. Mercutio, your logic and reason have stayed my impulsive digit from it's dire deed. Thank you.

[MercutioATC]

28. I've worked in law enforcement. I've seen the cops who are assholes.

I also know they're a small minority.

I used to work in law enforcement. I've been an air traffic controller for a little over 18 years now. I see the same thinking in the 9/11 Forum here..."There are procedures. Nothing should ever go wrong."

...and nothing could be further from the truth. The greater the need for procedures, the more likely one is to see bizarre variants and the more likely, despite training and planning, something is occasionally going to go wrong.

These Deputies did exactly what they were supposed to do. Unfortunately, the suspect still died.

[bertman]

33. yeah, I agree with you about the Deputies, but as far as the problems with 9/11,

it is a truly amazing coincidence of cosmic proportions that EVERYTHING--every single procedure--apparently went wrong. Or wrong enough, or just got shut down in a gargantuan fit of OOPS and on the worst possible day. But that's another discussion.

[spag68]

42. Death by strangulation

I must be on some right wing blog here, and here I thought this was a progressive site. First of all this so called war on drugs is such bullshit and we should realize this especially here. Where is it written that just because a person is a kop he gets to kill people? Call it homicide or murder the poor asshole is still dead and the kop is free to kill another day. What the fuck is wrong with you people? I realize that this is Louis ana, but for crying out loud is it any wonder that so many people don't trust the police? This site is now infested with gun-loving killer apologists who must be trolls, because I don't know any progressive who would give responses like I read here. It's sad to lose a great place for discussion like this, but it is just too frustrating to read this crap. I suppose that is the intention of these creeps, to put this place down. Or maybe we do live in an era where our freedoms are taken because of a traffic stop.

[ucfacde]

43. Legalizing drugs would cost to much

Legalizing drugs would cost to much, Bail Money, Fine money, Jail Charges money, Lawyers Money, Prison Owners Money, Jail Workers Money, Judge and Prosecutor Money, Parole officers, Stealing to get drugs more cops with more arrests more for the system, it would cost Society to much to much to Legalize Drugs and in this case funeral parlor money that I will not go into, except he got off easy.

[Fedja]

48. The bar moved and you didn't notice

Back when torture wasn't a daily subject, cops killing unarmed people in traffic stops was a bigger deal. Now it's protocol.

[Divine Discontent]

49. yes, you'd think people pushing pro-violent commentary would be tombstoned

I get reamed for being anti-death penalty probably from these same violence apologists. As someone always says, 'what if the death penalty kills someone who is innocent, as it will definitely do, what then?', but those who love revenge don't care, and always retort 'well, what if your friend or loved one is murdered heinously', and I say - lock them up and throw away the key. It also goes for cop apologists. This man was STRANGLED, I don't give a SHIT what the police policy is, I can't accept strangulation is a good practice! Also, I have no problem with someone having a basic rifle or pistol, but I'm sure there are several dozen on this site who defend full gun rights no matter what we're talking about, and attack gun control laws that try and keep them only in adult & non-criminal hands.

yeah, welcome to DU right???

I am Gay, and I was so angry in '04, '06, and '08 when I saw dozens of folks say I needed to accept 'now isn't the time for you to have those rights', and they say it every 2 years - it's bullshit - again, what site am I on? And I accept everyone's differences and choice to believe as they wish, and have friends of all types, faiths/beliefs, background. It's a shame we some who have been on here a long time are allowed to push a pro-violence agenda.

[cboy4]

52. ..

:loveya:

[Postman]

51. @ 5:30 or 5:31 the dash video is cut and spliced....

right after one of the cops radio's in that "the subject is detained at this time"....

[Mortos]

54. First of all the title of your post is wrong

The suspect died of several things according to the coroners report including, "...severe coronary artery disease, an enlarged heart, and a fracture of the hyoid bone in his neck." He also tested positive for meth.

I get so tired of all the whining that goes on and cop bashing here. Many of you take the scumbag meth dealers side regardless of the evidence or your own ignorance to officer safety and police procedures.

Here's an idea; say you are a 250 lb redneck drug dealer high on meth and you get pulled over. Give the officer your drugs and comply with his lawful arrest. Don't resist, putting the officers life in jeopardy and he won't have to escalate his use of force up to and including lawful deadly force and the criminal would have been out of jail in a few days to keep on dealing meth and or robbing innocent people to pay for his habit. Heck, as long as we are dealing in hypotheticals, he may have gone on to kill someone.

I would assume a 45 year old meth dealer probably has previous convictions, probably felony. It is also safe to assume that many drug dealers carry weapons. It is reasonable to assume that someone resisting arrest and trying to conceal something is dangerous. It is prudent for the officer to use physical force to try and detain a resisting subject.

This officer fought a large, meth intoxicated man for several minutes by himself and used reasonable force in doing so. He could have been overpowered and killed with his own weapon, or run over, or been forced to pursue an intoxicated driver endangering the lives of innocent people. The suspect died. Oh well. There is a saying in law enforcement, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. We had a highway patrolman who was killed with his own weapon in Oklahoma on a "routine" traffic stop by a man smaller than him who was high on meth.

I won't weep for the meth dealer who resisted arrest and put an officers life in danger but plenty of DU members will and I don't justify illegal or unneccesary force by law enforcement officers. I look at each case and judge it on it's merits. This cop did the right thing and he followed procedures and that is all that matters. All of the outrage and backseat theories about what he could of or should of done don't carry any weight with me or the actual law.

I arrested a guy who was on a 5 day meth binge. He resisted and got pepper sprayed and wrestled to the ground and cuffed after I chased him on foot for 5 blocks. I used appropriate force and he didn't die that day. The mother of his children did several hours before because he sliced her throat with a large knife in a hotel parking lot. He did this in front of his infant children. I was called because he was acting strange and trespassing on private property, a routine call. I didn't know him and didn't know what he had done earlier that morning. He is serving life in prison. Poor misunderstood guy.

[agardner5079]

59. EXCUSE me sir, the details in your post are WRONG!

First let me start out by saying I am not a convicted felon nor have I ever been arrested. My reason for posting this is to state the FACTS for the person who labels a dear friend of mine in the previous post, and I quote, "a 45-year old redneck, meth dealing thief".

I am currently a resident of Baton Rouge, however I lived in Livingston Parish for 15 years. I chose to relocate to Baton Rouge because of the distorted, dirty, and unlawful acts by police official as well as political officials in Livingston Parish. I am also a friend of the Stogner family. Let me start out by saying that in no way shape or form do I condone or support his possession of narcotics nor excuse it. However, I also DO NOT support the malicious devious acts of Deputy Chris Sturdivant.

Prior to Adam's addiction he owned his own business (and still does, which his wife runs)and was quite successful. He has NEVER been a "meth dealer" so please get your facts straight and have respect for the family of the deceased. Let me also add that he has NEVER stolen from anyone to support his habit. He and his family live very comfortably due to the success of a business they started over 10 years ago. The Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office continuously harassed Adam as well as his wife (which I may add did not live with him nor has she ever been arrested at all)over the course of the past 2-3 years unjustly. I mentioned earlier that he and his wife were not living at the same residence at the time of his death. They were separated and going through counseling. However, one evening his wife caught the sheriffs department ILLEGALLY searching a work shed on her property. Because of Adam's previous arrests and the amount of wealth he had the law enforcement officials were convinced he was manufacturing meth, HOWEVER he was NOT! They would stop at nothing, obviously not even DEATH to obtain evidence of any sort that would confirm their theory. If you watched the video you would be aware that Adam never once hit the officer, however the officer continues to kick/punch/knee him 8 times after he is on the ground and not moving. How can you justify that? In my opinion crawling toward the interstate looking for help because you are in fear of your life wouldn't quite fall under "resisting arrest", in your opinion however it may. In news reports the Livingston Parish Sheriffs office states that ignorant Deputy Chris Sturdivant pulled Adam over for suspected impairment because he was weaving in and out of traffic. Please remember, it was 4:16 am on a Sunday morning in a small town, there normally isn't very much traffic. However, when you watch the video you will only notice 1 (ONE) vehicle pass the entire time of the struggle. Ironically enough, the one vehicle that does pass right as Adam is veering off to the shoulder just so happens to fit the description of yet another Law enforcement officer by the name of Ken McMorris who also had a history of harassing Adam. This officer has been involved with almost every incident. Is this mere coincidence or what?

I will end in saying that I have full faith in Attorney Peter John, who is representing the family. He will not stop until this family receives justice, and the only way for that to happen would end in the arrest of Chris Sturdivant for homicide. I am sure the family will also file a civil lawsuit as well. Let me clarify one point though so that MORTOS isn't confused with any of the FACTS like he was in his previous post. The purpose of their civil suit will be based upon exposing the crooked, illegal, and unjust acts and practices of the Livingston Parish Sheriff's Department. It will NOT be based upon a "redneck" (as your refer to them) family trying to get rich quick. They are wealthy enough to support my family and yours as well MORTOS.

[Mortos]

61. I am sorry your friend died

But you make several errors in your defense of him.

I counted 30 vehicles passing the traffic stop during the struggle including 3-4 semis with trailers that come within feet of the struggle, not one as you claim.

You claim deputies repeatedly harrassed your friend. That's what police do to people who buy and use illegal substances. It is called law enforcement. Mr. Stogner had several previous arrests and convictions for drug use and possession.

The officer did strike and kick the resisting subject several times consistent with the proper application of use of force for an actively resisting suspect. He never struck him after he stopped moving as you claim. Medical help was called and officers began cpr on the unconscious man.

You defend your friend by saying he is not a dealer but was an addict. I am assuming his marriage broke up in part or whole due to his addiction, his wife had taken over his business and he was living in a separate residence due to his addiction. In my experience, people with that level of addiction will quickly devolve to dealing to support their habit. He was arrested the week before for possession of meth. He had meth on him the night of his death and tried to conceal/destroy it and he tested positive for meth at his autopsy. He was not the same upstanding business owner you portray him as and you don't know that he was not dealing as many addicts do to pay for their own addiction (in fairness, I don't know for a fact that he was a dealer either).

The meth addiction probably contributed to his heart disease which could expedite heart failure under the kind of physical energy he exerted to resist the officer. Many people have also choked on the plastic baggies they try to swallow which may have further contributed to his death.

He sounds like a man spiraling out of control and his actions caused his death. It is unfortunate but it is not the fault of the deputy.

It is almost inevitable that the family of someone killed in police custody will sue. They rarely prevail and the circustances shown in the dashcam prove that the deputy followed procedure and applied force properly based on Mr. Stogners actions. They will have a hard time proving their claim that he was murdered by a callous and corrupt deputy.

[KansDem]

56. He killed him. Pure and simple...

I read "250 pound man" on this thread as if there was justification for this kind of reaction, but the cop was on him from the start. I was expecting to see a physical confrontation, but there wasn't any. I might understand if the suspect took a swing at the cop, but that wasn't the case here. I didn't see any kind of attack on the officer. He just refused to cooperate and for that he gets a death sentence?

Does anyone here remember the "choke holds" of the 1980s?

And what about the other officers standing around chanting, "Is he breathing?" like a bunch of fuckwit rubes.

I do hope the officer got his evidence... He fought so hard to get it, after all.

[Mortos]

57. I am not familiar with the term "fuckwit rube"

maybe it's one of those things that takes one to know one. But you obviously have no idea what you are talking about but don't let that stop you from blathering on and making knee-jerk comments.

and don't forget to call 911 all panicky and scared when you need help. The police will still come and help you even if you think they are fuckwit rubes.

[KansDem]

58. Look at the video again...

The cop was all over him. If there had been a fight, then I might see justification in the cop's actions. But he was on his back and never let up. All because of what he might have put in his mouth. This was a summary execution.

And "fuckwit rubes?" That's when several folks stand around all bewildered asking, "Is he breathing?" when they should have been administrating CPR.

on edit: And why would I call 911? Joe Horn of Pasadena, Texas, showed us you can just blow the perps away with a shotgun and not see one day of jail time. (But maybe that's only in Pasadena, Texas?)

[Mortos]

60. Your argument would carry some weight

if you had any idea what you were talking about. You don't.

You can probably console yourself by googling "cop killed in the line of duty" and view what happens when an officer loses the fight.

Also check out the officer down (www.odmp.org) website and take a look at the faces and read the stories of the 21 officers (so far) this year who were shot and killed (most on routine calls)in the line of duty. That doesn't include the additional dozens killed in traffic collisions.

The visceral hate for law enforcement on DU really bothers me and makes me understand the us against them mentality many officers develop. I have been here for many years and have fought many fights against right wing conservative ignorance. The ignorance displayed by some in this thread is no different.

Educate yourself or preface your statements with "I don't know what I am talking about, but my gut feeling and emotional knee jerk response is..."

If you want become more knowledgeable, do a ride along with your local police department, work with a neighborhood watch organization, volunteer with a police athletic league. Look up the many resources on the web and read about the topic.

Here is a basic use of force guideline which the officer did not violate:

This model is adapted from a United States government publication on use of force.<5> It lists multiple tactics in order from least to most severe, but is only a partial model, as it does not give corresponding degrees of subject resistance.

Verbal command
Handcuff suspect
Use wrist/arm lock
Use take down
Block/punch/kick
Strike suspect
Wrestle suspect
Pepper spray
Use baton
Use firearm


The officer started at the lowest level which the suspect resisted. He then escalated based on the reaction of the suspect. The suspect dictates the level of force used and can stop the escalation or application at any time he decides to follow the officers instructions and stop resisting. This suspect did not stop resisting until he lost consciousness and the use of force stopped at that time.

As to your fuckwit explanation - wrong again. If you watched the entire video, when the officers realized the subject was not breathing, they immediately radioed for an ambulance and began administering cpr. I guarantee you the officer involved in this had no intention of killing this man and tried valiantly to revive him.