Quit coming over to Detroit and killing our children

[Locke09]

There is nothing at all to suggest that this child was a thug, as many would like to imagine. No one in the car was arrested for anything. It was a traffic stop for an expired license plate.

If this child was in a special education class, the disability was more than just a "learning disability". Learning disabilities like Dyslexia and even ADHD do not result in a child being placed in a special education class. This child might have simply become frightened by men approaching the car with their hands on their guns, as I believe police officers are trained to approach a vehicle.

Whatever the final results, you would think that people would have enough empathy for the loss of a child's life that they would refrain from demonizing the dead child until they had more facts.

And a person who suggests that 50% of African-American boys are learning disabled should provide some link to research.

This doesn't neceessarily have anything to do with racism or police brutality or thuggish Detroiters. It is a tragedy and the Warren mayor has enough sense to at least ask if there should be some re-evaluation of the use of tasers.

I can't imagine how people get to the point that they think it's okay to be so jaded about human life. In my opinion, when you get to that point you are of no more use to society than the others whose lives you place little value on. Some people obviously, for whatever reason, hate [[some) people and you can hear the hate dripping from their comments.

[Retroit]

How do age, height, weight, skin color, or learning ability give a person the right to flee from police? It amazes me that people bring these things up as excuses. If the guy was able to obtain a drivers license, I think we can assume he was intelligent enough to know not to flee from police.

And just for future reference, if you are a black Detroit police officer and my short, skinny, white, mentally challenged suburbanite son ever flees from you, please don't use a taser...use a gun!

[Locke09]

How do age, height, weight, skin color, or learning ability give a person the right to flee from police? It amazes me that people bring these things up as excuses. If the guy was able to obtain a drivers license, I think we can assume he was intelligent enough to know not to flee from police.

And just for future reference, if you are a black Detroit police officer and my short, skinny, white, mentally challenged suburbanite son ever flees from you, please don't use a taser...use a gun!

A. The young man who was killed was not the driver.

B. For the sake of your skinny, white, mentally challenged suburbanite son, I hope you are kidding. Because if I were your skinny, white mentally challenged suburbanite son and I read your post, I would assume you hate me. I would not understand how you would tell someone to shoot me when I am fleeing.

[DetroitDad]

I would rather be shot than tasered. I have a bad heart as it is.

[lilpup]

There is nothing at all to suggest that this child was a thug, as many would like to imagine. No one in the car was arrested for anything. It was a traffic stop for an expired license plate.

If this child was in a special education class, the disability was more than just a "learning disability". Learning disabilities like Dyslexia and even ADHD do not result in a child being placed in a special education class. This child might have simply become frightened by men approaching the car with their hands on their guns, as I believe police officers are trained to approach a vehicle.

Whatever the final results, you would think that people would have enough empathy for the loss of a child's life that they would refrain from demonizing the dead child until they had more facts.

And a person who suggests that 50% of African-American boys are learning disabled should provide some link to research.

This doesn't neceessarily have anything to do with racism or police brutality or thuggish Detroiters. It is a tragedy and the Warren mayor has enough sense to at least ask if there should be some re-evaluation of the use of tasers.

I can't imagine how people get to the point that they think it's okay to be so jaded about human life. In my opinion, when you get to that point you are of no more use to society than the others whose lives you place little value on. Some people obviously, for whatever reason, hate [[some) people and you can hear the hate dripping from their comments.

Including the comments form the boy's family members [[which is what most are really reacting to).

[9mile&seneca]

I thought about living vicariously through my kid, and encouraging him to be a thug, and fight the cops, and taking his side against all authority. That would show them. But then I turned fourteen. And by the time my kid came along I just worked two jobs and he went to college to be an accountant.

[EastsideAl]

The penalty for riding in someone else's car that isn't properly licensed shouldn't be to be chased down by cops and electrocuted. From the facts disclosed thus far they had very little reason to pursue this young man in the first place, and tazer use seems completely over the top and unwarranted. He was dumb to run, no doubt, but given the fact that he didn't even commit the rather petty offense for which they were stopped, the reaction of the police seems more than a little out of proportion. But it seems like a lot of police these days are leaning a little heavily on the purportedly "non-lethal" magic of the tazer rather than go through the old fashioned work of subduing a suspect.

Also, I am always shocked at the amount of collective guilt and fear people are willing to put on those who are unlike themselves. Statements about the incident in Oak Park - where someone who actually commited a crime shot a police officer - show me that some folks just can't let go of the notion that "they" are all alike. So then, I guess because of what Eric Harris and Dylan Kliebold did in Columbine we should assume that any white teenage boy might be armed to the teeth and ready to go randomly massacre a school full of kids. So taze those scary white teens first and ask questions later!

[Locke09]

People posting assumptions and vilifications of the young man here are worse than the family members, in my opinion. The family members can be excused because of the emotion involved. What is the excuse for the rest of us? We cannot excuse our comments on the basis that we are responding to what we believe are inappropriate comments from a distraught family.

You might hope that everyone would reserve comment until an investigation is done. I'm sure there has to be a thorough one done whenever there is such an incident. You might hope that even the family would say, "We are waiting on the outcome of the investigation before we render judgement and decide what our next step is." But most people aren't that calm and logical when their child has died.

BTW, when dealing with the developmentally challenged, what you perceive as "fighting authority" might be to them "defending and protecting" themselves.

I remain perplexed and disgusted by many of the comments here. They bespeak the prejudices that exist in our minds, as even the comments of the family and community spokespersons bespeak the prejudices that exist in theirs.

[lilpup]

They pursued because he ran. When someone runs without apparent cause and does not heed orders to stop there is sufficient suspicion to pursue. For all the police knew the runner could have been a suspect in a crime or had an arrest warrant out against him, motivating him to flee.

Like it or not Tasers are not classed as lethal weapons and their use is actually preferable to a hands-on approach because their mechanical nature exerts a uniform known and controlled effect whereas hands-on force by a human does not.

[Detroitej72]

The bottom line is had Mitchell listened to the police and not resisted, he would be alive today. Take some personal accountability for your actions folks.

I do think they need to take a closer look at tasers, since there are deaths, which are not supposed to happen. I'm sure the offices had no intention or clue that tasering would kill this lad, contrary to what his family says.

[Bobl]

I thought about living vicariously through my kid, and encouraging him to be a thug, and fight the cops, and taking his side against all authority. That would show them. But then I turned fourteen. And by the time my kid came along I just worked two jobs and he went to college to be an accountant.

Excellent quote. Should be read by all parents and children.

I should note that I once considered throwing my two teen aged children out of the house, quick, while they still knew everything!
But they always knew that you do not run from the cops...

[detmich]

The penalty for riding in someone else's car that isn't properly licensed shouldn't be to be chased down by cops and electrocuted. From the facts disclosed thus far they had very little reason to pursue this young man in the first place, and tazer use seems completely over the top and unwarranted. He was dumb to run, no doubt, but given the fact that he didn't even commit the rather petty offense for which they were stopped, the reaction of the police seems more than a little out of proportion. But it seems like a lot of police these days are leaning a little heavily on the purportedly "non-lethal" magic of the tazer rather than go through the old fashioned work of subduing a suspect.

Also, I am always shocked at the amount of collective guilt and fear people are willing to put on those who are unlike themselves. Statements about the incident in Oak Park - where someone who actually commited a crime shot a police officer - show me that some folks just can't let go of the notion that "they" are all alike. So then, I guess because of what Eric Harris and Dylan Kliebold did in Columbine we should assume that any white teenage boy might be armed to the teeth and ready to go randomly massacre a school full of kids. So taze those scary white teens first and ask questions later!

Nice attitude, no wonder the kid is dead with silly outlooks on life like that. The child should have been taught not to run from the police. Period. Anything else that you or anyone else says is a rationalization pure and simple. In most of the United States we exist as a nation of laws. Apparently in Detroit it is not so.

[Angry Dad]

When I was a kid, I wasn't afraid of the police.

I was afraid of what my parents would do to me if I was brought home by one.

Yeah it's an old cliche'.

But you tell me how much Fieger is going to sue the Warreen police department for.

Not only are the kids screwed up these days, so are the parents.

[FlyingJ]

No cop wants some suspect they don't know to get the drop on them;
http://www.freep.com/article/2009040...l+stay+in+jail

Nobody ever mentions it, but the LAPD Division involved in the Rodney King beating had endured the first policewoman killed in the line of duty not 3 weeks before during that same shift...she had stopped to roust a couple drunken winos when one of them got the idea to shoot her;
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...ogID=455791079

It doesn't sound like the Warren cops were out of line, and nobody here would fault them between going home to their family or ending up like Samborski

[2blocksaway]

I think a lot of cops are jerks. I work in the service industry and I see a ton of badges right before I am asked for a favor.

The conversation usually starts like this..." Hey, I am with the ____ Police/ Sheriffs department. Could you.......... for me?

Uh no.

I digress.

Bottom line is if you run from a cop in uniform all bets are off.

Keeping that in mind , the cops chasing need to know when to stop pursung if it becomes too risky for others.

The cops don't know why the person is running. He could have had a trunk full of guns, weed, coke, or who know what. The cops didn't know this kid was " developmentally disabled" .

I really wonder if he was. I would like to see some evidence.

The kid didn't deserve to die but who knew he would die froma tazer.

[9mile&seneca]

Look. please. can anyone here just please, the point I am trying to make is that the police just have much much too big a role in people's lives. 40 years ago, the average American hardly saw an officer. Now they are there to see if I'm wearing my seatbelt?!!!! Please people! Do you even remember your fathers? Do the words none of your damn business even mean anything? Did you ever see "Invasion of the Bodysnatchers?" Only non pod people need answer.

[Ocean2026]

Some outside perspective:

You guys live in Detroit. The rest of the world basically considers Detroit a crime-ridden disaster and statistics back up Detroit as the crime capital of the country.

Every criminal committing a crime -hurts the usual people but also makes Detroit a worse place to live.

If the kid did nothing wrong he should have walked up to the cop given his name and asked if there was a problem. By running, he diverted police resources from catching other criminals. By the way in Texas, going into a house and scapping is Burglary of a Habitation and can result in a life sentence. I don't know if Michigan has the death penalty but in balance its a good thing.

I voted for Obama and never ever considered voting for Bush- I'm no conservative, but years of prosecuting and defending criminals, has made me callous to their pleas.

The Detroit Police are your police- corrupt, racist or dishonest ones need to be removed. Other than that back them to the fullest.

[Detroitej72]

I wonder where the Ron Scotts of the world were when Officer Samborski was killed? I guess they only care about people who are not law enforcement officials getting killed.

[cloud_wall]

The penalty for riding in someone else's car that isn't properly licensed shouldn't be to be chased down by cops and electrocuted.

Well put. This, to me, is the bottom line. Running, in and of itself, is not a crime. It doesn't even establish probable cause to arrest someone, despite all caps arguments to the contrary.

[[“[i]t is a matter of common knowledge that men who are entirely innocent do sometimes fly from the scene of a crime through fear of being apprehended as the guilty parties, or from an unwillingness to appear as witnesses. Nor is it true as an accepted axiom of criminal law that ‘the wicked flee when no man pursueth, but the righteous are as bold as a lion.’�)

The question is not whether running was stupid or smart, it's whether the people in a position of power acted properly. They didn't.

Also, I think it's true that police use tasers far too comfortably. I was eating dinner in Warren a few weeks ago and watched a white guy - who had been running from a store owner after committing a crime and then stopped running when he saw an officer coming for him and reaching for his hip - get tased for a long time while he was just standing and waiting for the officer to arrest him.

It's become clear that this is not a weapon to be used lightly. That fact evidently isn't being taught in training.

[detmich]

Well put. This, to me, is the bottom line. Running, in and of itself, is not a crime. It doesn't even establish probable cause to arrest someone, despite all caps arguments to the contrary.

[[“[i]t is a matter of common knowledge that men who are entirely innocent do sometimes fly from the scene of a crime through fear of being apprehended as the guilty parties, or from an unwillingness to appear as witnesses. Nor is it true as an accepted axiom of criminal law that ‘the wicked flee when no man pursueth, but the righteous are as bold as a lion.’�)

The question is not whether running was stupid or smart, it's whether the people in a position of power acted properly. They didn't.

Also, I think it's true that police use tasers far too comfortably. I was eating dinner in Warren a few weeks ago and watched a white guy - who had been running from a store owner after committing a crime and then stopped running when he saw an officer coming for him and reaching for his hip - get tased for a long time while he was just standing and waiting for the officer to arrest him.

It's become clear that this is not a weapon to be used lightly. That fact evidently isn't being taught in training.

Sorry, but you are dead wrong, pardon the pun.

[ghein]

Call me crazy, but if it became commonplace for the police to not pursue those those who flee from them... won't that just lead to more people running from the police? And if you know you can run, and thus not get caught, wouldn't people be more likely to do illegal things?

This is one of those situations where the infamous and often misused "slippery slope" applies. It will create problems if people have a reasonable chance of breaking the law and getting away with it.

[reddog289]

I myself learned at a young age having been raised by a reserve officer who was backed up by his brother, who was an Ann Arbor cop, Listen to the Police, If you are not doing anything then hopefully you will be let go and that will be that.But as everything else in life exceptions apply. I myself at one time tried to lose the Westland cop following me by crossing over into Garden City. It was an equipment violation. I got a warning and made damn sure I took care of the problem.
From the photo I have seen of this young man, I myself couldn't tell if he was learning disabled.My oldest "girl" is special ed and I myself have been told I have A.D.D.. Both of us know not to run from the Police.
I feel sad for the young man who ended up dying, Who knows were and what could have become with his life. And I also feel for the officer who used the Tazer on him.
Lowell made a great point about the reverse of the situation.What is the whole point though of having laws if they cannot be enforced, and people always trying to skirt them?And if YOU do something wrong it is never your fault inthe first place.

[firstandten]

This may seem simple and commonsense but its worth remembering. This should be explained in detail by all people but especially by black parents and understood by black youths since they are victims of profiling especially in suburban areas and because of their youth may have anger management issues.

1) Keep Your Private Items Out of View
This is common sense: Always keep any private items that you don't want others to see out of sight. Legally speaking, police do not need a search warrant in order to confiscate any illegal items that are in plain view.
2) Be Courteous & Non-Confrontational
If you are pulled over, the first thing you should to do is turn your car off, turn the dome light on [[if it's nighttime), roll down the window, and keep your hands on the steering wheel. Don't immediately reach into your glove compartment for your license and registration. Officers want to be able to see your hands for their own safety. Wait until the officer asks to see your paperwork before retrieving your documents.
The first thing you should say to the officer is, "Hello officer. Can you tell me why I am being pulled over?" The officer may give you a hard time or say, "Why do you think I pulled you over?" Tell the officer you don't know. Most importantly, do not apologize after you get stopped, because that can be considered an admission of guilt and could be used against you later in court.
Show your identification if it's requested. Be respectful and non-confrontational. Refer to the police as "Sir," "Ma'am," or "Officer." Remain calm and quiet while the officer is reviewing your documents. If the officer writes you a ticket, accept it quietly and never complain. Listen to any instruction on paying the fine or contesting the ticket, and drive away slowly.
3) Just Say "No" to Warrantless Searches
Warning: If a police officer asks your permission to search, you are under no obligation to consent. The only reason he's asking you is because he doesn't have enough evidence to search without your consent. If you consent to a search request you give up one of the most important constitutional rights you have—your Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
A majority of avoidable police searches occur because citizens naively waive their Fourth Amendment rights by consenting to warrantless searches. As a general rule, if a person consents to a warrantless search, the search automatically becomes reasonable and therefore legal. Consequently, whatever an officer finds during such a search can be used to convict the person.
Don't expect a police officer to tell you about your right not to consent. Police officers are not required by law to inform you of your rights before asking you to consent to a search. In addition, police officers are trained to use their authority to get people to consent to a search, and most people are predisposed to comply with any request a police officer makes. For example, the average motorist stopped by a police officer who asks them, "Would you mind if I search your vehicle, please?" will probably consent to the officer's search without realizing that they have every right to deny the officer's request.
If, for any reason you don't want the officer digging through your belongings, you should refuse to consent by saying something like, "Officer, I know you want to do your job, but I do not consent to any searches of my private property." If the officer still proceeds to search you and finds illegal contraband, your attorney can argue that the contraband was discovered through an illegal search and hence should be thrown out of court.
You should never hesitate to assert your constitutional rights. Just say "no!"
4) Determine if You Can Leave
You have the right to terminate an encounter with a police officer unless you are being detained under police custody or have been arrested. The general rule is that you don't have to answer any questions that the police ask you. This rule comes from the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects you against self-incrimination. If you cannot tell if you are allowed to leave, say to the officer, "I have to be on my way. Am I free to go?"
If the officer says "Yes," tell him to have a nice day, and leave immediately. If the officer's answer is ambiguous, or if he asks you another unrelated question, persist by asking "am I being detained, or can I go now?" If the officer says "No," you are being detained, and you may be placed under arrest. If this is the case, reassert your rights as outlined above, and follow Rules #5 and #6.
5) Do Not Answer Questions without Your Attorney Present
There is no reason to worry that your failure to answer the officer's questions will later be used against you. The truth is just the opposite: Anything you say can, and probably will, be used against you.
In just about any case imaginable, a person is best off not answering any questions about his involvement in anything illegal. Assert your Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights by saying these exact words: "Officer, I have nothing to say until I speak with a lawyer."
*Remember- If you do choose to answer any of the officer's questions, always be honest. Police are not easily tricked and will often become hostile if they feel disrespected. If you feel it is best not to answer truthfully, then don't say anything at all.
6) Do Not Physically Resist
If the police proceed to detain, search, or arrest you despite your wishes—do not physically resist. You may state clearly but non-confrontationally: "Officer, I am not resisting arrest and I do not consent to any searches." Or you may assert your rights by simply saying nothing until you can speak with an attorney.
» printer friendly page

[EastsideAl]

Nice attitude, no wonder the kid is dead with silly outlooks on life like that. The child should have been taught not to run from the police. Period. Anything else that you or anyone else says is a rationalization pure and simple. In most of the United States we exist as a nation of laws. Apparently in Detroit it is not so.

What attitude? If we're a nation of laws then we are ALL governed by them, even the police. Police are not gods, and don't have the right to summarily electrocute, or execute, people simply for leaving their presence. Nothing in the law gives them that right when not under direct threat, and nothing in the law gives them the right to hunt down and attack people who have committed no crime.

[Locke09]

This could get interesting because it might challenge some of what we think we know about the law.

Remember that the child was merely a passenger in a car pulled over for expired tags. Certainly the police have a right to control movements of both driver and passengers to the extent that they need to protect their safety. For instance, they could order everyone to get out of the vehicle, or order everyone not to move. Did they do either in this case? If they ordered the child not to move, beyond what was necessary for their safety, then had they in effect seized and detained him, without probable cause that he had committed a crime? If they ordered him out of the vehicle, or said nothing to him before he fled, then the child was free to leave unless there was reasonable suspicion he had committed a crime.

In any event, his running away from them did not put them in jeopardy and gave them no reason for pursuing him. You can't pursue someone just because it's possible they might have a warrant or might have committed some unknown crime at some unknown point in time in some unknown place. You have to have reasonable supicion that they have committed a particular crime. The officers should not have pursued him and they would not have had to worry about their safety to the extent that they had to taser the child.

People keep arguing that the police have to pursue criminals or suspects or everyone will think they can get away with crimes. That is an irrelevant argument here because no crime was committed by the child or suspected to have been committed by him. Unless the Warren police were profiling them??? The Warren police should not be wondering why he ran, they should be wondering why they pursued.

The juvenile passenger of a vehicle, who has committed no known offense, should not be left dead at the end of a routine traffic stop. That is just as senseless to me as when officers are killed during traffic stops.