RE: Police walk in on exorcism

RE: Police walk in on exorcism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Real0ne -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 10:09:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster You need to look up the definition of "murder." If it's not intentional, it's not murder. Intent is one of the necessary elements of murder. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne killing an unarmed man is "murder" regardless if it is intentional or not. correct i had a brain fart :)

nyrisa -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 1:06:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Shouldn't cost them anything. The grandfather attacked a sworn officer, a felony, while the officer was attempting stop the abuse of a child, a few more felonies, and the officers used non lethal force and didn't initially resort to batons and the like. The grandfather's cause of death is almost certainly going to be drug related although a bum ticker is an outside possibility. Juries don't often decide in favor of the estate of a guy abusing his child when it sues the peace officers that were trying to save the child. well it is going ot be interesting and we will have to keep an eye on it, killing an unarmed man is "murder" regardless if it is intentional or not. THe archilles heel here is that the man from what i could tell had no weapon. Oh, please......visualize what was happening. The man had the child by the neck, choking her. A 3 year old's neck is fragile, and can easily be broken by a grown man's hands, and her trachea is even more fragile and does not take much pressure to crush. The man would not release the child, so he was stunned. He still did not release her, so he was stunned again. Are two officers and a crazed man supposed to play tug of war with this girl's neck, until gentle reasoning and persuasive entreaties convince the man to loosen his choke hold on her throat? The officers had seconds only to save this girl's life, if he had her by the throat. A stun gun is not intended as lethal force.....but if someone has an underlying medical condition that would react poorly to stunning, and elects to choke a child anyway, then I can honestly say he has only himself to blame. I will ALWAYS support the decision to protect the child. Here is a description of the incident: ********* A bed was pushed up against the bedroom door but officers were able to push it open a few inches, allowing one to peer inside and see that 49-year-old Ronald Marquez was clutching his bloodied granddaughter, who was crying in pain, screaming and gasping as Marquez choked her, Tranter said. A bloody, naked 19-year-old woman who was determined to be Marquez's daughter and the girl's mother also was in the room, chanting "something that was religious in nature," the spokesman said. The officers then were able to force open the door enough for one to enter, leading to a struggle in which the officer used a Taser stun gun as he tried to free the girl, Tranter said. After the initial stun had no visible effect on Marquez, a second officer also squeezed into the room and Marquez was stunned a second time, allowing one of the officers to free the girl and pass her out the door to the relative, Tranter said. http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/194007.php

Real0ne -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 2:40:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nyrisa Oh, please......visualize what was happening. The man had the child by the neck, choking her. A 3 year old's neck is fragile, and can easily be broken by a grown man's hands, and her trachea is even more fragile and does not take much pressure to crush. The man would not release the child, so he was stunned. He still did not release her, so he was stunned again. Are two officers and a crazed man supposed to play tug of war with this girl's neck, until gentle reasoning and persuasive entreaties convince the man to loosen his choke hold on her throat? The officers had seconds only to save this girl's life, if he had her by the throat. A stun gun is not intended as lethal force.....but if someone has an underlying medical condition that would react poorly to stunning, and elects to choke a child anyway, then I can honestly say he has only himself to blame. I will ALWAYS support the decision to protect the child. Here is a description of the incident: ********* A bed was pushed up against the bedroom door but officers were able to push it open a few inches, allowing one to peer inside and see that 49-year-old Ronald Marquez was clutching his bloodied granddaughter, who was crying in pain, screaming and gasping as Marquez choked her, Tranter said. A bloody, naked 19-year-old woman who was determined to be Marquez's daughter and the girl's mother also was in the room, chanting "something that was religious in nature," the spokesman said. The officers then were able to force open the door enough for one to enter, leading to a struggle in which the officer used a Taser stun gun as he tried to free the girl, Tranter said. After the initial stun had no visible effect on Marquez, a second officer also squeezed into the room and Marquez was stunned a second time, allowing one of the officers to free the girl and pass her out the door to the relative, Tranter said. http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/194007.php The way i see it the officers should have just shot the guy, why bother with a stun gun at all? i do not really have a problem with them trying to seperate them i have problem with them using lethal force to do so. Stun guns are lethal in all to many cases. That and granted his hands were around the kids throat does not "gaurantee he was choking her". The child may have just been gasping from the work of trying to fight or who knows what? Granted the officer had no way to know it was a ritual until after the fact but i think it is to early to determine if in "fact" he was "choking" her. i have never heard of an exorcism that included killing the person as a means of completing the process. a slug in the jaw would have loosened the mans grip too. The point here is you have no way to know that the girls life was in fact in danger. Do i condone such activity? no of course not. Do i feel that the officers were correct in stopping it. yes Do i feel the only way was to use a stun gun? Obviously not. i always support the decision to protect the childs life as well as the perps unless the perp places the officers life in danger which was not the case here. Most likely the city will end up footing the bill for leaving them use the devices in the first place.

nyrisa -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 3:33:39 PM)
A "slug in the jaw" could have killed the man, also. It is not the neat trick which is shown by stunt doubles in the movies. Intracranial hemorrhage, spinal fracture, paraplegia.........not to mention possibly fracturing the knuckles of the policeman, too. Unless you mean to whack him with a club? But that can be lethal, too. To have wrestled him into submission with a choke hold could be lethal, too. Any kind of scuffle has the possibility of turning lethal. Let's face it, there is just no safe way to resist arrest with violence. The man had the choice to resist, or to let go of the girl. Everyone has to live with the choices they make.....some just don't have to live with them for more than a few seconds, as in his case. Also, you stated: "That and granted his hands were around the kids throat does not "gaurantee he was choking her". The child may have just been gasping from the work of trying to fight or who knows what? Granted the officer had no way to know it was a ritual until after the fact but i think it is to early to determine if in "fact" he was "choking" her. i have never heard of an exorcism that included killing the person as a means of completing the process." Let me see......hands around the throat of a child who is struggling, bleeding, screaming, and gasping. I am going to just have to go with the circumstantial evidence on this one. There are not too many benign occasions which require one to grasp a child by the throat. And as to whether the exorcism was intended to kill the child or not......moot point. See the above. I respect that other people have different opinions, but I have to say, in this instance, your arguments are disturbing, if not downright scarey. No disrespect intended, I just got a queasy feeling reading them.

Estring -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 3:41:52 PM)
It amazes me that anyone would want to be a policeman or woman these days. You are damned if you do or damned if you don't. Someone here questioned why they didn't just shoot the grandfather instead of using a stun gun, because stun guns can be fatal. Lol. What? The blame should be on the perpetrator of the crime, but too often the police are the ones who get ragged on.

nyrisa -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 3:47:48 PM)
I agree totally. I don't see how a police officer can deal with John Q. Public day in and day out, and NOT end up despising most people. To see so many officers who are honorable and hardworking despite the conditions is a strong testament to their character, in my opinion.

luckydog1 -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 4:46:51 PM)
"The way i see it the officers should have just shot the guy, why bother with a stun gun at all? i do not really have a problem with them trying to seperate them i have problem with them using lethal force to do so. " Wouldn't shooting the guy be lethal force?

Aswad -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 6:27:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy Just out of curiousity, I thought the Catholic Church was getting away from exorcism... anyone got more recent info? They're not big on talking about it, and some of them are losing their original faith, yes. But as far as I know, there's one certified exorsist not far from where I live. Choking isn't part of the procedure, though, as far as I know.

Aswad -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 6:32:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thelunabird He was probably on drugs like PCP, cocaine, or some other drug that makes your heart race... Or had a heart condition, typical at his age, or was taking prescription drugs. And ... angel dust? That's so rare I thought it was a pun. Yes, I know WP lists it. quote: thats why stun guns are illegal or not used by police departments in so many states. There are several reasons. And the best ones have nothing to do with lethality.

Casie -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 6:35:04 PM)
While I believe exorcism can be effective in the sense someone believes they are possessed and believe and exorcism cure them.. and it usually does but not in a three yr old of course. Mind over matter type deal. I think the police acted professionally. And I doubt and charges will come up against them. My question is what kind of mom watches their three old be choked and does nothing? People make me sick sometimes

Real0ne -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 10:29:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nyrisa A "slug in the jaw" could have killed the man, also. It is not the neat trick which is shown by stunt doubles in the movies. Intracranial hemorrhage, spinal fracture, paraplegia.........not to mention possibly fracturing the knuckles of the policeman, too. Unless you mean to whack him with a club? But that can be lethal, too. To have wrestled him into submission with a choke hold could be lethal, too. Any kind of scuffle has the possibility of turning lethal. Let's face it, there is just no safe way to resist arrest with violence. The man had the choice to resist, or to let go of the girl. Everyone has to live with the choices they make.....some just don't have to live with them for more than a few seconds, as in his case. Also, you stated: "That and granted his hands were around the kids throat does not "gaurantee he was choking her". The child may have just been gasping from the work of trying to fight or who knows what? Granted the officer had no way to know it was a ritual until after the fact but i think it is to early to determine if in "fact" he was "choking" her. i have never heard of an exorcism that included killing the person as a means of completing the process." Let me see......hands around the throat of a child who is struggling, bleeding, screaming, and gasping. I am going to just have to go with the circumstantial evidence on this one. There are not too many benign occasions which require one to grasp a child by the throat. And as to whether the exorcism was intended to kill the child or not......moot point. See the above. I respect that other people have different opinions, but I have to say, in this instance, your arguments are disturbing, if not downright scarey. No disrespect intended, I just got a queasy feeling reading them. my point is that the officers used lethal force when their lives were not in danger. i already agreed that they had no way to know it was an exorcism. and i said i do not condone it. neither do i condone the officers handling of it. what more can i say. you can paint that nay old evil way you like.

Real0ne -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/30/2007 10:31:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 "The way i see it the officers should have just shot the guy, why bother with a stun gun at all? i do not really have a problem with them trying to seperate them i have problem with them using lethal force to do so. " Wouldn't shooting the guy be lethal force? never fails that you woudl show up and spin it so far out of context we are no longer on the same planet.

nephandi -> RE: Police walk in on exorcism (7/31/2007 2:56:32 AM)
Hi While i normally are a strong oposer of police using deadly force if not under direct threath themself, here i agree whit what they was doing. They were not planning to kill the old man, but he died from the stuns, and they did what they had to do to save the little girl's life. The case is, religious lunatics can be very unpredictable, and while i am sure the olice had wanted the little girl safe and the grandfather in custody, they had to think of the victim first, their number one priority was to stop the abuse of the little girl and get her out of that room alive. The case is no the officer's lives was not in danger, but the little girl's life was. And they did beside not intentianally use deadly force but the old man's hearth did not handle the strain of the stunns. But tell me, what was they suposed to have done, let the old man strangle the girl? While the police is often more brutal than they have to be, i do not see this to be the case here. quote: They're not big on talking about it, and some of them are losing their original faith, yes. But as far as I know, there's one certified exorsist not far from where I live. Choking isn't part of the procedure, though, as far as I know. Also Master as far as i know, when one call an exorsist, it is either to clear a house of evil, or to do the ritual on somone that is a willing participant, not on a helpless child. i belive there are evil in the world that can posess somone, but far to many nut cases see the devil in the bushes and hurt pepole, and i do not think the Chatolic Church would start whit a full exorsism ritual on a child or at least not one that risked harming the child. i wish you well

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875