Cop Shoots Mom, PD circles wagons
Mar 18th, 2008 by Mark
A San Diego Police Department Officer shot a woman and her son in the parking lot of Lowe’s in Oceanside on Saturday. (as far as I know, SDPD are not required to live in the city, good thing as they could not afford it)It is believed to be a “road rage” incident. She is said to be a military wife.
The Cops ain’t talking, and it’s causing talk of a cover up.
who what when where and how
The shooting occurred at Lowe’s — in the parking lot — on Old Grove in Oceanside.
The victim is in her 20s and her son is 8 years old. They both were air-lifted for care. The mother went to Sharp Memorial Hospital, and the boy went to Rady Children’s Hospital.
It took three days for the SDPD to release the name of the officer, and that appears to only have happened after being pressured to do so.
Once they have more information they will determine what, if any charges should be filed, Poorman said. No one has been arrested.
Do you think a non-cop would be so lucky? Not likely.
So who was at fault
The cops are not saying who is at fault. It took three days to ID the officer.
The Oceanside Police Department is handling the case. Neither department said they would comment on the shooting until the investigation is complete.
Are you telling me that if the cop was in the right they would not be talking? They would be yelling from the rooftops, if he was in the right.
Police have not said who they think was the aggressor in the incident, but they believe it started after one of the parties committed some sort of right-of-way violation in front of the parking lot. When it was over, the officer had fired two bullets through the windshield of a Honda. Inside were a woman and a child.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want the cop to be wrong; however I am sick of the attitude of the cops doing whatever they please.
Tags: san diego, police, oceanside sdpd, opd, shooting, lowes
[...] Comments « Cop Shoots Mom, PD circles wagons [...]
[...] Cop Shoots Mom story 1 [...]
[...] Cop shoots mom Sphere: Related Content [...]
[...] Cop shoots mom [...]
[...] Cop shoots mom [...]
It does appear that this woman is not the model citizen but that does not mean that an off duty (or on duty for that matter) police officer is justified in shooting an unarmed woman and an 8 year old child. Are the police that weak and fearful that they feel a woman and a minor are a threat to his life (over a traffic incident - mind you)? A lot of attention has been focused on the fact that she had DUIs and had a suspended license. My God, well that sure justifies the officer’s use of deadly force. Let’s shoot everybody with a suspended license. Let’s just call it open season on anybody who has been in trouble or does not follow the letter of the law. Be sure to include the OCPD and DA which is not allowing her attorney access to evidence which is REQUIRED by law. If you do not smell cover-up or preferential treatment here you need to see your ENT specialist or you are simply recovering form a frontal lobotomy. I’m sorry if you find this offensive, I simply forgot, Accountability is un-American!
On second thought, give the officer a weekend getaway with ex-governor Spitzer and buy them a couple of hookers and throw in a game of golf with Marion Barry and OJ Simpson.
Amazing, how some people are so desperate to find something wrong with society they will side with a known criminal who is flagrantly breaking the law and DRIVING A LOADED WEAPON.
In “German’s ” world the criminal gets unlimited chances and is always believed; whilst cops are automatically guilty and should be locked up.
Gee I wonder why criminals think they get away with murder? hmm. let’s think about that.
It’s also clear that German thinks he is an attorney, he is not.
1. only after you are charged, AND THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY REQUESTS the case files, is the DA (not the PD) required to turn them over. Guess you missed that day in High School ‘be a lawyer’ class.
2. invoking irrational conclusions only makes you look like an idiot. No doubt accurate. As you have no clue what happened maybe you ought to get the facts and stop automatically siding with the criminals.
3. a vehicle IS A DEADLY WEAPON ESPECIALLY IN THE HANDS OF A DRUNK. You must have missed the film “Red Pavement” in driving class.
Some people will always defend criminals and portray them as victims, even though it’s an idiotic position. These same people — who will never trust any in authority unless they are liberals — whip out the ol’ conspiracy theories.
Oh yes, it MUST be a cover-up. The driver won’t talk to police, she must be “covering up” her guilt. Hmmm.
Grow up, German.
[...] Cop shoots mom [...]
THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THE COP SHOOTING THE MOM AND CHILD. PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO FIND A SAFE PLACE TO PULL OVER .THAT WOULD NOT BE IN THE RT. LANE OF TRAFIC. HE HAS TO BE CHARGED WITH AGGRIVATED ASSULT ON A ADULT, ENDANGERING A CHILD AND OR MINOR.ATTEMTED 1ST DEGREE MANSLAUGHTER CHARGES ,2X’S . POLICE BRUTALITY ,2X’S AND ANY OTHER CHARGE THAT WOULD BE PUT ON ANY CIVILIAN. IF HE WAS IN DANGER HE WOULDA SPOKE OUT BY NOW. THIS IS LIKE SHOOTING A GUY 44X’S FOR GETTING HIS I.D. OUT OF HIS POCKET.
I LAST THING, WE AS PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CONCIDED INNOCENT BEFORE BEING FOUND GUILTY,SO ALL YOU PEOPLE SAY SHE MUSTA DID SOMETHING TO CAUSE HIM TO SHOOT INTO THEIR CAR. I SAY, YOU GO HARRASE A COP WITH WORDS AND NO WEAPONS AND THEN SEE IF YOU THINK YOU WERE UNJUSTIFIELY SHOT AS WELL AS YOUR CHILD. GROW UP AMERICA,THESE COPS ARE OUT OF COLLAGE AND ARENT READY FOR THE STREETS ,OR TO BE IN A COP CAR BY THEM SELVES.TEAM UP COPS LIKE IN NYC,THEN THE CRIME RATES WILL DROP LIKE ROCKS FROM THE SKY.
Paul,
Typing in all caps? Really now. Aren’t we a bit old for that? Oh yeah, and why the fake URL?
If ‘we as citizens ‘are to be considered innocent until proven guilty’; doesn’t that apply to the officer as well?
He doen’t have a “right to shoot the mom and son”? Are you retarded? If you point a vehicle at me, you are gonna die. PERIOD.
I hope Paul is not the typical American, if he is we are screwed.
Let’s all get past the rhetoric and misspellings. At issue is, if he were not a cop were would he be right now?
Answer, in jail.
Almost anything can be considered a lethal weapon if you work at it. Seems to me it was an even fight until the cop pulled his gun. If this doesn’t smack of Police State nothing does.
There is a reason why Lady Justice has a blindfold on. No one is above the law.
I learned this in my kindergarten “Jr. Critical Thinkers” class.
So Fred Flintstone — who used a phony email and accessed my site from his job — you think that the only issue is whether the cop should be in jail? Whether he gets fair treatment is unimportant to you? Whether she tried to run him over with her car, is unimportant? Why this habitual criminal — Silva — is still on the streets, is not important? Why this same person is putting her son at risk is not important? Why she was engaged in a “road rage” incident is not important?
OR WHY SHE HAS NOT BEEN ARRESTED AFTER CLEARLY BREAKING THE LAW AND I WOULD GUESS THAT SHE IS ON PROBATION OR PAROLE ALREADY, AND YET SHE WALKS. Oh, she is the “victim” and we don’t expect victims to obey the law. What crap.
If she did not get a felony the second time, then why? I think that is big issue. I guess wanting irresponsible people off the street is only OK if it’s a cop you want off the streets.
Why are we supposed to suddenly believe her now? Oh she is a mother, and her son was shot, so she is a “victim”; and “victims” can do no wrong even when clearly breaking the law. Or is that you believe cops are always wrong no matter what?
It’s clear that we have way bigger problems than whether this cop should have been arrested. It’s clear that this women should have been in prison. It’s not so clear that Officer White is getting special treatment. It’s also NOT clear if Silva was the aggresor. It is clear that people automatically take sides with criminals over cops and are willing to dream up the most idiotic reasons to do so.
The biggest problem we have is the rationilizing that only the “criminals” we don’t like should be arrested. Pathetic.
[...] Cop shoots mom [...]
[...] Cop shoots mom [...]
[...] Cop shoots mom [...]
So Officer White was afraid that Silva would kill him and his wife with her car.
She was yelling and revving her engine. She parked so close to him that he couldn’t open his car door.
White was so afraid that he displayed his gun.
At that point would Silva be able to pull out a gun of her own and shoot White saying that she was afraid that White was getting ready to kill her and her son?
Why is it ok for White to be in fear for his life because he thinks Silva might ram him but Silva can’t be afraid of White’s pistol?
The contact between the two cars as they “sideswiped” was not enough to put a dent in Silva’s Honda.
We have not been allowed to see White’s car.
However light the contact it caused White to open fire at a range of only a few feet.
Officer White was operating under the commonly used excuse for shooting, “trying to run me over”.
The police can use any movement of a vehicle as an indication that the driver “tried to run me over” and open fire.
This is one of the few excuses left for shooting someone and it is often used by police nationwide.
If Officer White gets away without being judged by a jury it will be because the police investigation was biased.
It needs to go before a jury. Let the people decide.
Get a clue “alwaysright”, and all of you cop haters. If you think someone pointing their car at you is not a threat, come on over, and let me run you over with a car; let’s see how you think then.
I am so tired of this bull-crap that a car is not a weapon. Most of you seem to forget SHE PURSUED HIM, not the other way around. She was aggressively and clearly not in control of her faculties.
Funny how “alwaysright” wants a trial for the officer but not for the drunkard Silva who tried to run officer White down, and who has a history of drunkenness, being high, breaking all manner of laws, AND PUTTING HER SON IN DANGER ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. Oh but she is the “victim” and the “hero” in this situations. Disgusting. Hypocrites.
Officer White started shooting when the two cars made contact in as police put it, a “sideswipe”.
Looking at the Silva’s car, there are no dents, only a few light scratches.
No evidence of any ramming or attempt to ram.
In other words, no real reason for White to fear for his life.
Silva did not point her car at him.
Officer White fired through his driver side window into Silva’s passenger side window.
Then as Silva continued to move parallel to him, he fired four shots into her windshield.
She did pursue him into the parking lot. She pulled up parallel to him very close to his door but did not make contact at that time. She revved her engine and was yelling at White.
He displayed his pistol. I believe this was an overreaction.
After he displayed his pistol, I believe that Silva was within her rights to do whatever was necessary to protect herself and her son from the danger that White presented.
Silva was in fear for her life.
And as it turned out, she was right.
I want Silva prosecuted and tried for whatever crimes she committed. I am in no way making excuses for her bad behavior and for endangering her son.
Officer White’s behavior needs to be examined by a jury in a court of law. Let the members of the jury decide if he had any reason to feel that it was necessary to shoot a woman and child.
I’m afraid that a jury will never get to hear the facts because the police and the district attorney will refuse to prosecute because White is a policeman.
If any normal citizen did what White did he would be facing attempted murder charges.
You can’t shoot to kill because someone is yelling at you and makes some contact between cars.
An ordinary citizen shooting in this situation would be in jail and you know it.
No she was wrong.
If I break into your house, rape your wife, threaten you with a knife, start packing up all your belongings AND THEN YOU PULL A GUN and show it; I do not suddenly become a victim and have the right to defend myself. I don’t understand why some don’t get that.
A car is a deadly weapon — if you have been hit by one, as I have; you understand this all too well –; she threatened him not vice-versa, and she does not have the right to defend herself by continuing the attack.
As for Bonnie “dumb-ass” Dumanis, only her incompetence can slow this from going to trial; which it no doubt will.
If Silva had not put her child’s life in danger, she would have been arrested the minute the police arrived on the scene. All the whiners crying about “the child” is slowing them down. So spare me the “if it was you” bull-crap. It’s nothing but weak logic to defend a position that is untenable.
If she was in prison — where she belongs — this would not have happened.
1. “No she was wrong.
“If I break into your house, rape your wife, threaten you with a knife, start packing up all your belongings AND THEN YOU PULL A GUN and show it; I do not suddenly becomes a victim and have the right to defend myself. I don’t understand why some don’t get that.”
Nothing like that happened. Just because her car made very slight contact with White’s car does not give him reason to shoot to kill.
In order to defend himself with lethal force he must have good reason to believe his life is in danger. He was inside his car and no contact at all had been made when he pulled out his gun
“A car is a deadly weapon — if you have been hit by one, as I have; you understand this all too well –; she threatened him not vice-versa, and she does not have the right to defend herself by continuing the attack.”
She pulled up along side of him, yelling and revving her engine. She made no physical contact until after he displayed his pistol. She made slight contact as she moved her car. It was not an attack and there was very superficial contact. No dents, nothing.
A car is only a deadly weapon if someone is using it as one. The movement of her car in no way threatened his life.
Officer White was not a policeman standing out in the open where he could have been run down in an instant. He was inside his car.
Yes, Silva could have started ramming his car and White could have been injured or killed. But White had no reason to think that Silva was going to do that. The slight contact was not enough to justify White shooting into Silva’s car at a range of little more than arms length.
“If Silva had not put her child’s life in danger, she would have been arrested the minute the police arrived on the scene. All the whiners crying about “the child” is slowing them down. So spare me the “if it was you” bull-crap. It’s nothing but weak logic to defend a position that is untenable.”
Her drunken state was not reason for shoot to kill.
“If she was in prison — where she belongs — this would not have happened.”
If Officer White had not gone out of control and shot an unarmed woman and child over contact less than a fender bender none of this would have happened.
So let me get this straight, a bomb is not a deadly weapon UNTIL it’s used? That’s your thinking on this. Seems odd. I didn’t realize the laws of physics had been suspended in the ‘black hole’ that is Rachel Silva’s life.
So if I point a gun at you, it’s not a threat? Isn’t pointing your car at me and gunning the engine a threat? Of course it is. You can’t have it both ways.
I love how the defenders of Rachel Silva claim she was shot for being drunk. This of course requires great leaps of logic (lack of actually) and ignoring that she was threatening a man and his wife with her vehicle (a deadly weapon) and seems to have been acting ‘crazy’. Who other than a crazy person does that? Oh yea, murderers.
Do you run around town aggressively following people in your car, yelling at them while gunning your engine after you pin them into a parking lot? Neither do I, however I am not a drunken crazed maniac who has anger issues. You still don’t get it do you?
4000 pound car driven by maniac woman who has pointed it at someone gunning the engine (a threat); and you think that’s no reason to act in self-defense? Wow. Does she have to kill someone first? Guess so.
How many more times does she get to put people’s lives at risk — especially her own son’s life; aren’t children supposed to be protected — before we lock her up? Does she actually have to kill someone before we stop her? Seems so.
Be honest, if her son had not been in the car NONE of you would have sided with her. Pathetic. Why aren’t you pissed off at her for putting her son in a dangerous position? Guess cop hating is more in vogue, than outrage over endangering kids whilst drunk and high. Disgusting.
1. on 29 May 2008 at 6:03 pm22Mark
“So let me get this straight, a bomb is not a deadly weapon UNTIL it’s used? That’s your thinking on this. Seems odd. I didn’t realize the laws of physics had been suspended in the ‘black hole’ that is Rachel Silva’s life.”
It may be a deadly weapon as it sits on the deck, but it can’t hurt you unless someone sets it off.
“So if I point a gun at you, it’s not a threat? Isn’t pointing your car at me and gunning the engine a threat? Of course it is. You can’t have it both ways.”
If you are sitting in your car and you show your pistol to a drunk, yelling woman who is parked parallel to you very close to your car, you can’t start shooting just because her car touches your car.
There is no threat to your life just because her car touches yours. You can’t open fire on someone who hits your car in a fender bender on the theory that they might back up and hit you again and again.
“I love how the defenders of Rachel Silva claim she was shot for being drunk. This of course requires great leaps of logic (lack of actually) and ignoring that she was threatening a man and his wife with her vehicle (a deadly weapon) and seems to have been acting ‘crazy’. Who other than a crazy person does that? Oh yea, murderers.”
There was no credible threat to White’s life.
“Do you run around town aggressively following people in your car, yelling at them while gunning your engine after you pin them into a parking lot? Neither do I, however I am not a drunken crazed maniac who has anger issues. You still don’t get it do you?”
Before the drunken crazed maniac was shot, she called 9-11 to report a man threatening he with a gun. Yes, she was drunk and yelling and revving her engine, was not a serious threat to Officer White.
“4000 pound car driven by maniac woman who has pointed it at someone gunning the engine (a threat); and you think that’s no reason to act in self-defense? Wow. Does she have to kill someone first? Guess so.”
Did you ever see a demolition derby? Claiming that White had to shoot the woman and her son because Silva might have rammed his car is nothing more than a poor excuse for White’s behavior when he went out of control.
“How many more times does she get to put people’s lives at risk — especially her own son’s life; aren’t children supposed to be protected — before we lock her up? Does she actually have to kill someone before we stop her? Seems so.”
“Be honest, if her son had not been in the car NONE of you would have sided with her. Pathetic. Why aren’t you pissed off at her for putting her son in a dangerous position? Guess cop hating is more in vogue, than outrage over endangering kids whilst drunk and high. Disgusting.”
I believe you are a policeman. Claiming that someone “tried to run me over” is one of the last excuses that today’s police have for shooting someone. When a policeman is standing near a vehicle, any movement of that vehicle can be clamed to be an attempt to kill the officer.
A car can be a deadly weapon. But it isn’t always a deadly weapon. If a policeman says he was threatened, then the police department will almost always side with the officer.
In this case “she tried to run me over” is a cowardly excuse for the behavior of an out of control policeman who shot a woman and child.
Only another policeman would stand up for that cowardly behavior.
“She might have injured me so I shot her and her eight year old son”
What a coward.
So “allwaysright” you witnessed this event? I ask because you say she called “before” she was shot. How would you know? She doesn’t recall, and the 911 tapes are under seal. You know for a fact that she did not call 911 and then go after them again? Then how can you say for certain what the time line was?
Interesting how you dodge the issue of the car being a weapon. You also seem to not get the whole threat thing. The reason to have a bomb is so people will understand that it CAN be used. The mere fact that you have it, is a threat. Geez.
I don’t have to wait for you to shoot me before I shoot back. It only takes a belief that you intend to hurt me, not an overt act; merely the threat. A 4000 pound plus threat is enough for me. I wouldn’t have shown her my weapon, I would have shot her till she was dead. As long as she can drive the car; she is a threat to my life (in this case).
You choose to believe there was no threat because you have decided to side with criminals. Remember she has admitted to going after him, and threatning him.
Demolition derbys are in gutted cars by people wearing safety equipment and inside roll cages, and backing into other people who have maneuverability. Second, anyone who has been in a demo derby has protection on track. The drivers don’t keep going after you take down your flag. The only thing that stopped Silva, was being shot. BTW, Demo derby drivers die regularly; and all sustain head and neck trauma during the derbys. So spare me the “it’s safe” bullshit.
Evey time you make a point, you prove mine.
I love how all you ‘Monday morning Quarterbacks’ have decided the case. It’s easy to sit in your safe home, on you computer telling everyone she was not a threat WHEN YOU HAVE NO F’N CLUE. It’s a whole other world when you are in that situation.
You just hate cops, and you don’t care what the truth is; you just want to undermine the Justice system in order to undermine America.
You believe I am a policeman? Is that the best you can do? Even if I am, it doesn’t matter …. maybe you are felon …. hmm seems so now that I think about it. See how stupid that is?
A car IS a deadly weapon.
How sad you must be, hating people because they wear a badge. You must have a really fucked up life. How many years have you been ‘down’?
Did everyone catch how he tossed in “shot her son”? Pathetic attempt to make it sound like it was intentional.
People get in road rage arguments all the time. The idea that you can shoot to kill because you think that some screaming nut case just might ram your car is ridiculous.
If they have a gun pointed at you that’s different. You need not wait to be shot in order to defend your life from a man pointing a gun at you, Silva had no gun. The claim that Silva was going to ram Officer White’s car and he had to shoot Silva and her son at a range of only a few feet, is nonsense.
The police report and the holes in Silva’s car show that White first shot went through his driver side window into Silva’s passenger side window. That means the cars were side by side when he first shot.
She started backing away and White fired four more shots into her windshield, in an attempt to kill Silva and her son.
A 4000 pound car can be a weapon. But you can’t start shooting people because you think that the car might be used as a weapon unless you are a policeman.
A policeman can claim that his life was in danger from a vehicle that tried to drive away as the policeman was standing beside he car writing a traffic ticket. The vehicle need not have run over his foot or caused him to jump back.
All he needs to say is “He tried to run me down” and he can start shooting.
How would that work for a civilian? Could I start shooting at someone who caused me to jump back when the car didn’t yield to me when I was in a crosswalk at an intersection?
The defense that “He tried to run me down” only works if you are a policeman.
If you disagree please tell me when I, as a civilian, can open fire in a traffic situation. You can start with the crosswalk example.
And yes, Officer White did use deadly force that was not necessary for his defense. He is a coward who shot an unarmed woman and her 8 year old son.
“I was afraid she might hurt me so I shot her and her son at close range?
What a coward.
The more I think about your position on this shooting, the more I see that you must be a policeman.
Your attitude centers around, “when am I allowed to shoot someone?”
“What can I use as an excuse?”
This was a simple everyday road rage incident and the only reason we are talking about it is because Officer White shot an unarmed woman and her eight-year-old son.
Officer White’s police department is stalling for time in the hope that people will forget what really happened. This is obvious. How many investigations of a shooting drag on for months?
This miserable piece of crap shot an unarmed woman and her young child at close range because he went out of control when Silva yelled at him in a road rage incident.
Anyone can see that the shooting was unnecessary and criminal.
Officer White’s cowardly claims that he was in danger are a farce.
And if his police department lets him get away with what he did, I hope the people will call for the removal of any official who sides with Officer White’s cowardly behavior.
The more you think about it? When did you start. I find it funny you think I am a cop. So much for your deductive skills, then again you have been way off on most of these since the beginning.
The only farce is your thinking on this. Hmm, are you related to Rachel Silva? Based upon your thinking and “logic” clearly you must be.
You want to remove any official who “sides” with White? Dumbest thing I have ever heard. You must be a liberal. Only a liberal would try and silence dissenting voices with which they disagree with threats of retaliation. Unreal. Guess “innocent until proved guilty” only applies to drunks who endanger their child repeatedly and and have high priced legal talent.
BTW all you leftys will be upset to read this story as well: Cop shoots ‘mugger’.
You can read about how he chased him down the street, and the found the gun in the Officer’s car’s wheel-well. Oh yeah, your head will explode
“innocent until proved guilty”?
If Officer White were to be charged criminally and taken to trial then the jury would decide innocent or guilty.
I am afraid that the police department who investigated and the DA will prevent White from ever going before a jury.
Tell me…. Do you really think a civilian could get away with what White did and never be charged?
And as I have said, Silva should be charged with whatever crimes she committed. That has nothing to do with Officer White shooting her and her child.
Officer White’s cowardly attack was absolutely unnecessary. He might be able to slink away by using the policeman’s excuse that he was in danger of being killed. That might work in his police department. But any normal person would reject his whining, cowardly excuse for the shooing.
And that is exactly why he will not be charged criminally and he will not go before a jury on criminal charges.
The City knows that they will be in civil court on this and they don’t want to go into civil court trying to defend a convicted criminal and so they won’t charge White.
The real crime is that the City gets to prevent White from being judged.
The City and the Police Department are not disinterested parties in this case.
Any City employee who uses his position to prevent White from getting a fair criminal trial should be fired.
Funny, all of sudden you want Silva charged; that’s a new tack.
The city is always in civil court when a criminal gets shot; hell even when a criminal gets his feelings hurt. Funny how you seem to think that the Police should not be allowed the same protections we are ALL guaranteed under the Constitution.
You also seem to think a “fair trial” is one where everyone works to convict someone with little to no evidence of wrongdoing by believing the criminal and creating facts because a cop was involved. Hmm isn’t this just the type of behavior you accuse cops and DAs of doing; except in reverse? You think that is “fair”, or OK? I don’t.
Seems to me you are more concerned with having a “witch hunt” than getting the facts, much less a “fair trial.” You say that any “city employee” who prevents White from getting a “fair criminal trial” should be fired. Hmmm, so the 5th amendment does not apply here? What about a “city employee” who investigates the alleged crime and finds no cause to go forward? Are you going to “witch hunt” them also? Sure seems so. You don’t want a fair trial, you want destroy someone you hate.
Now imagine yourself a cop — hard to do, since you are no doubt a many time loser aka felon who has been “down”, you know ‘done time’: hey if you can assume I am a cop, then I can assume your a multiple-felon who hates cops, maybe even a cop-killer — if you are out on patrol and you see someone engaging in dubious behavior; are you going to be more or less likely to see what they are doing after considering the rhetoric that people like you and OB Rag and Roger Hedgecock are putting out? Are you going to be more likely to look the other way knowing that the liberals have won, and no one supports the police anymore? You would walk away; and that is what is happening. Criminals are winning and it’s because people like you automatically assume the cops are wrong and then make up stories and pretend to know facts you don’t; so as to “get the cop” and be a “hero.” Well you are not a hero, you are part of the problem. It’s people like you who make it impossible for cops to do their jobs, thus assuring that only the bad ones will remain. So in the end you get your wish, nothing but bad cops to bitch about.
If Officer White is out of line, then fine do what needs to be done. However, Rachel Silva has ZERO credibility and can not be believed. Until someone comes forward who can be believed and says he was out of line then I am siding with White.
Once again I repeat, if she had not put her son in danger NONE OF YOU WOULD BE BITCHING ABOUT THIS INCIDENT.
I will feel much safer with Rachel Silva in prison and her son with a responsible adult, than I will with Officer White off patrol. She is a clear danger to Society, he does not appear to be so.
Oh and how come Rachel Silva gets 3 bites at the apple, yet Officer White gets none? Shouldn’t he get multiple chances like she did? Tell me again how it’s not “cop hate” that drives you.
Post #19 I said;
“I want Silva prosecuted and tried for whatever crimes she committed. I am in no way making excuses for her bad behavior and for endangering her son.”
“You don’t want a fair trial, you want destroy someone you hate.”
I wan’t White’s actions to be judged by a jury of citizens, not the police department or the DA. I want all the evidence brought out, no witch hunt, no kangaro court.
I simply want White to get a fair trial so we can see if ordinary citizens think that he was justified in shooting a woman and child.
“It’s people like you who make it impossible for cops to do their jobs, thus assuring that only the bad ones will remain”
We want to get rid of cops who shoot people who don’t need to be shot.
If White had not started shooting, the cops would have locked her up when they got there.
Silva should be charged with her crimes and a jury should hear the evidence in open court, evaluate the evidence and render a verdict.
Officer white should be charged with shooting Silva and her son. And a judge or jury should hear all the evidence in open court, evaluate it, and render a verdict.
I don’t want anyone railroaded or covered up.
Let the people decide if White acted in a reasonable way.
Anyone who prevents White from standing trial should be fired.
“whatever crimes she committed”, and just what would those be? You seem to know everything about the events that transpired BUT HAVE YET TO DEMAND HER PROSECUTION FOR SAME. You sure as hell are not outraged that she was flagrantly violating laws and court restrictions AND putting her son in danger AGAIN.
So let me get this straight, the cops and DA are not citizens and no longer get treated like the rest of us? Oh yeah, that sounds like a job I want. Straight to trial for every PERCEIVED or real transgression, you badge wearing jackasses. Great, that should grind the courts to a halt. Even more so than usual.
The fact that you have decided he is guilty belies your rhetoric. You want a witch hunt and you want a pyre, now! Scew due process; appearence is all that matters so we can “hang’em high”.
How can you say you don’t want to railroad someone, when all you have done is demand he be charged and tried for his actions? Actions you demean and attack at every turn? Beyond that you want to short circuit the process, because he isn’t being jailed fast enough for you. However Rachel Silva, still not charged and not in prison; and that does not bother you one bit.
If he did something wrong, fine; let’s deal with it the right way. Your way is not dealing with it the right way. It’s telling cops we are going to prosecute you any time we get pissed off at you. — and who knows what tomorrow’s “outrage” will be; it’s kids today, trees in the 70s, Africa in the 90s — As a cop you no longer are considered innocent, you are going to court immediately. Anyone who doesn’t do what we want to get you to court and into jail as fast as possible, is going to follow you to the ‘gray bar motel’. Yep, I can see all the good people in the county lining up for that kind of treatment. Oh yeah, and don’t you dare use the vehicle as weapon “lie”. We know cars can’t hurt you; so it’s all b.s.
I know you will say that you only want to prosecute the “bad cops”; problem is that you don’t know who they are, but want to prosecute now, now, now! Think about it.
Who is next for your “special treatment”: Doctors, EMS techs, Firemen, Truck Drivers? Who? If cops are going to be assumed guilty, then so can anyone else. If the DA is no longer the “law” in the county then the county is not a sovereign entity and loses all power.
If that’s what you want then work for it legally. Just don’t bitch when some prosecutor based in Sacramento decides you did something wrong and you end up in jail without a trial and they are running a PR offensive to convict you in the media.
If you don’t like Dumanis — and I don’t — then work for her to lose her job. We don’t need anymore ad hoc Government entities making up rules, taxing, and jailing people because they got a hair up their butts. The exact thing you complain about, btw.
If you want to short-circuit the system; don’t whine when it zaps you. If a cop is given due process, then no one will be.
“BUT HAVE YET TO DEMAND HER PROSECUTION FOR SAME. You sure as hell are not outraged that she was flagrantly violating laws and court restrictions AND putting her son in danger AGAIN.”
**************
I have no reason to believe that Silva will somehow avoid being charged. I don’t know any other way to say it. I’m not making any excuses for her. She should be in jail.
**************
“The fact that you have decided he is guilty belies your rhetoric. You want a witch hunt and you want a pyre, now! Scew due process; appearence is all that matters so we can “hang’em high”.”
**************
No, That’s not what I think. That’s what you are using as some kind of smokescreen in order to prevent Officer White from going before a jury.
Officer White’s actions were not simple cut and dry police work.
The shooting of a woman and child under the circumstances that prevailed need to be examined by a jury.
Had a private citizen done exactly whet White did there is no question that he would be charged.
*************
“How can you say you don’t want to railroad someone, when all you have done is demand he be charged and tried for his actions? Actions you demean and attack at every turn? Beyond that you want to short circuit the process, because he isn’t being jailed fast enough for you. However Rachel Silva, still not charged and not in prison; and that does not bother you one bit.”
*************
In reality Silva is in jail as we speak.
My demand that White be charged and tried is in no way “railroading” White.
It is the way this kind of shooting would be taken care of if White were not a policeman.
A shooting of a woman and child as the result of a road rage incident would result in charges and criminal court where a jury would decide if the shooting was justified.
************
“I know you will say that you only want to prosecute the “bad cops”; problem is that you don’t know who they are, but want to prosecute now, now, now! Think about it.”
***********
I believe that any normal person would think that shooting a woman and child while off duty, no badge displayed, in a road rage incident, deserves to go to criminal trial.
It looks like Officer White just might be a bad cop. I want a jury to decide. I don’t want the local government to prevent this unusual case from being heard in a public courthouse.
***********
“Who is next for your “special treatment”: Doctors, EMS techs, Firemen, Truck Drivers? Who? If cops are going to be assumed guilty, then so can anyone else. If the DA is no longer the “law” in the county then the county is not a sovereign entity and loses all power.”
**************
A smokescreen like that isn’t going to fool anyone. If you have run out of logic just stop writing.
The DA is not a disinterested party in this case. The DA works for the City and the City stands to lose big money in a civil case brought by Silva and her son. The DA has reason to avoid taking White to criminal court.
**************
“If that’s what you want then work for it legally. Just don’t bitch when some prosecutor based in Sacramento decides you did something wrong and you end up in jail without a trial and they are running a PR offensive to convict you in the media.”
**************
No one will end up in jail without a trial. You really need to stay logical or people will think you don’t know any better.
The DA brings charges against people who he believes have broken the law.
Then the DA takes those charges before a jury.
All I want is for Officer White to go before a jury where he can explain why he shot a woman and her son in a road rage incident.
If his actions make sense to the jury then he will go free.
You aren’t afraid that a jury will think he overreacted, do you?
**************
“If you want to short-circuit the system; don’t whine when it zaps you. If a cop is given due process, then no one will be.”
**************
Again, you don’t seem to understand that White being charged and put on trial for his actions, IS DUE PROCESS.
If he is not charged then he is avoiding the DUE PROCESS that any ordinary citizen would receive when they shot a woman and child in a road rage incident.
You say that Officer White is dodging prosecution because he has not been charged. How can you say that she won’t avoid prosecution, since she has not been charged? Even worse the case was passed off to the State who is even less likely to do anything.
Rachel Silva IS NOT in jail, and has not been for some time. She spent less than a week in jail for her SECOND DUI conviction. Check here if you don’t believe me: Silvas in Jail in San Diego County
As for you other disinformation … where to start.
1. Bonnie Dumanis is NOT a city employee. She is a county employee.
2. Even if White is charged and convicted, the City of San Diego is not in bad shape. Officer White was not on duty at the time, he was not in San Diego (city), and if he is convicted it will no doubt prove that he did not follow procedure (you see when you are convicted of a crime, it’s you who is responsible) which lets San Diego off the hook.
3. The DA is not always the “charging authority”. … and it’s a she btw.
You seem to be quite ignorant of the law these days. It is quite routine for people to be put in jail without being charged. Even more so, property is routinely confiscated without due process.
You see, you are advocating railroading him. You only go before a jury (as you say) when the DA decides to charge you (felonies only), then the DA goes to a Grand Jury to secure an indictment (you seem to forget that step), then they arrest the suspect, then they discuss a plea bargain. The only time it goes to a jury is if the accused is wrongly accused or feels s/he can get off by swaying a jury.
Going before a jury DOES not in anyway mean that you have to explain ANYTHING. It’s called the Fifth Amendment and you seem to want it gone. You are demanding that Officer White explain himself in front of a jury; Constitution be damned. That is not due process. Your version, is not due process. You don’t want due process, you want vengeance for a perceived wrong. How sad that you are so hateful that you are opening espousing subverting due process, and either don’t understand that or don’t care. I think it’s the latter. You want blood, period.
Your whole argument is that he should go straight to court. Funny, that is not the process at all. So how is it “due process”? Like I said, let the system work.
Funny how you don’t give a damn that Rachel Silva is running free and putting people’s lives in danger every day.
“You say that Officer White is dodging prosecution because he has not been charged. How can you say that she won’t avoid prosecution, since she has not been charged? Even worse the case was passed off to the State who is even less likely to do anything.”
*********
Only Silva’s case was passed to the State. The decision to charge White is still with the county.
**************
“You see, you are advocating railroading him. You only go before a jury (as you say) when the DA decides to charge you (felonies only), then the DA goes to a Grand Jury to secure an indictment (you seem to forget that step), then they arrest the suspect, then they discuss a plea bargain. The only time it goes to a jury is if the accused is wrongly accused or feels s/he can get off by swaying a jury.”
***************
But if the DA does not bring a charge against White we will never hear his explanation of what happened. Well at least till he goes to civil court.
****************
“Going before a jury DOES not in anyway mean that you have to explain ANYTHING. It’s called the Fifth Amendment and you seem to want it gone. You are demanding that Officer White explain himself in front of a jury; Constitution be damned. That is not due process. Your version, is not due process. You don’t want due process, you want vengeance for a perceived wrong. How sad that you are so hateful that you are opening espousing subverting due process, and either don’t understand that or don’t care. I think it’s the latter. You want blood, period.”
*********************
All I want is for White to go to trial for shooting the mother and child.
I want White to be treated exactly the same way as an ordinary citizen.
If he decides not to testify in his criminal trial, so be it, that’s his choice.
Whatever the due process calls for is what I want. No railroading, no blood. Nothing more than fair treatment under the law.
There is no way that a civilian could shoot a woman AND a LITTLE BOY in a road rage incident and not face some kind of charges.
Only a policeman would claim that White’s action was without question legal and proper and therefore not require any charges.
*****************
“Your whole argument is that he should go straight to court. Funny, that is not the process at all. So how is it “due process”? Like I said, let the system work.
Funny how you don’t give a damn that Rachel Silva is running free and putting people’s lives in danger every day.”
*********************
Just to put that one to bed, I have said before and I say again, Silva should receive jail time for drunk driving and for endangering her child. And if the DA sees fit, charge her with assault with a deadly weapon.
I don’t want White to go straight to court. I want the DA to take White’s case before a grand jury.
If the DA can get an indictment I want White to go before a jury and be given a fair trial. If he or his lawyer can convince a jury that it was ok for White to shoot a woman and boy because he thought he was going to be killed, ok, then he did nothing wrong.
Let the case be treated as any other road rage case that results in a woman and boy being shot.
I can tell you for sure that White will not be able to convince a jury that he had to start shooting because he thought he was going to die.
And that is why I will be very surprised if we get anything more than a statement saying White will not be charged.
Attempted murder would be the charge if an ordinary citizen did the shooting.
As a policeman, White knew that he could use deadly force against someone who moved a vehicle in such a way that he could claim that he might be hit.
I believe that in the excitement of the road rage, White forgot that he wasn’t in uniform.
I believe that he used the excuse that he was in fear for his life and started shooting.
I do not believe that White actually thought he was about to die and I do not believe that White would be able to convince anyone on a jury that he did the right thing when he shot Silva and her little son.
I will be pleasantly surprised if White is charged. I believe that the County will cover for him and not bring any charges.
Officer White is a coward. When Johnny Silva gets up on the witness stand and shows his scar, the jury will see what a worthless coward White really is.
Gee Always thanks for pointing out what we all know and exactly what I said: Silva’s case was passed off INSTEAD OF HER BEING CHARGED. Sometimes you are like a TV announcer who tells us what we just saw; or worse repeats what we all just heard.
So you say that White knew this, and White knew that, and White did this because of that …. Are you a mind reader? No? You are just someone looking to railroad Officer White, and make up excuses — they are not reasons — to justify your blatant hatred and clear attempts to subvert the Constitution, due process, and that little ol’ thing called the Law. You want more proof? This statement is a classic.
You my friend have taken leave of your senses. Please access your tin foil hat storage area and implement your alien ray protection immediately.
This of course means it was premeditated, which is idiotic. How did he know that a two time loser out on bail with a suspended license would be driving in that area and ready to attack anyone who dared to not give her the right of way AND have the opportunity to shoot said person. This so he could enjoy the nuts and flakes calling him GUILTY WITHOUT ANY PROOF. Oh yea, I can see how you think that.
Even worse you are now making accusations that Officer White is unstable, WITHOUT ANY PROOF. Funny how we have lots of proof that Rachel Silva is a threat, but you don’t care about that. You only care about getting the copper! Pay back for that ticket, yea mudder fudder!
You don’t have to fear for your life, only for your safety or the safety of others. Since you were not there, and have NO PROOF that you are right; you are as dangerous as Rachel Silva, maybe more so.
So because you believe WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE WHAT SO EVER of this and that and why and when: straight to jail with a quick trip through a rigged trial. Yea, no railroading going on here.
Yea no railroading there. Then again maybe they will see what a piece of garbage Rachel Silva is, and put her in prison for life.
Either put on a dress or get some balls. You are truly pathetic. Oh and thanks for proving me right. It’s about getting the cop, not about protecting kids. If it were you would demanding that Racel Silva be charged and dragged into court. You just won’t admit that she put her son in danger, not Officer White. Yea, no cop hate in you.
No doubt you are an Obama supporter as well.
Your bombastic smokescreen doesn’t hide the facts.
Officer White shot a woman and her eight year old son because he was angry and out of control.
And you know that any private citizen, who “defended” himself with close range gunfire, wounding a woman and child, would be charged with a crime.
You continue to ignore that.
Please tell us what would happen to that non-policeman who shot a woman and child because he thought the woman’s driving would be a danger to himself or others.
As I said, Silva should be charged and be jailed for whatever they can charge her with. Drunk drivers don’t often avoid trial and so I’m confident that she will get what’s coming to her.
I don’t want her to get away with anything.
But policemen often avoid charges in shootings by claiming that they were afraid that someone was going to “run them down”.
If someone is trying to run you down, ok, shoot to kill.
But I know of at least two police shootings in my area where the “tried to run me down” was nothing but an excuse.
One case in Alexandria Virginia was so blatant that the department changed their policy because of the shooting.
In that city the police are no longer authorized to simply stand in the street and stary shooting.
They now must try to step out of the way if possible.
This was in response to an off duty police shooting into the front, side and back of an SUV with five teens who had run out on a Denny’s bill of $24.
The gallant policeman killed an Eagle Scout in the back seat of the SUV.
That officer was not charged because he said he was in fear for his life. He could have simply stepped out of the way. He said his department regs didn’t say that he had to step out of the way.
A policeman who would do what that cop did or what Officer White did is a great danger to the community.
Worse than a drunk driver? I don’t know, perhaps not.
But no community needs a policeman who avoids common sense and uses regulation excuses to shoot a woman and child.
Officer White is a coward who shot a little boy.
And only a worthless policeman would defend what he did.
Your constant repetition of the same made up nonsense does not change the facts. You can repeat the mantra over and over that ‘her son was shot’, the facts do not support your suppositions or accusations. IT’S HER FAULT HER SON WAS SHOT. She is a typical criminal, working the system and has people like you dancing on a string.
You have not proved that Officer White was “out of control”, or angry, or “in uniform”, or any other nonsensical belief you may have.
The facts are this:
1. Rachel Silva is a two time loser on DUI (just that, who knows what else).
2. Rachel Silva was driving on a suspended license.
3. Rachel Silva was out on bail, awaiting sentencing on a second DUI.
4. Rachel Silva was inebriated at the time of “road rage” (which SHE engaged in, not Officer White).
5. Rachel Silva was in possession of a controlled substance without authorization.
6. Rachel put her son in danger … again.
7. Rachel Silva has a history of lying to Police (and herself, and no doubt her family and friends)
8. Rachel Silva is a proved loser.
To date she has not been arrested, charged, or even accused of endangering her child and others. You say Officer White is ducking justice for the same reasons; you say nothing of Rachel Silva doing the same. You do make up excuses for her.
Rachel Silva is a criminal.
Officer White, as far as I can tell has an unblemished record, and is NOT a criminal.
You side with the criminal and demand Officer White not receive due process. You say nothing about Rachel Silva, except when called on it and only then in vague generalities.
Once again you prove me right. You say he is guilty because he shot a little boy. The insinuation is that he did it intentionally. Yet you proffer no proof, other than wild accusations.
Oh and before you start saying that all cops are the same and dragging out one incident that has nothing to do with another (and providing no evidence it happened as you say it did); remember it works both ways. Rachel Silva is a proved Drunk Driver. They all lie, they all put others at risk, they never learn. Why is she not in Prison, and why are you not outraged that she is using her son as a shield to keep her sorry worthless ass out of jail? Oh that’s right, you are single-parent-pot-head-drunk-loser also. Just using your logic.
Officer White did not have to shoot into Silva’s car when he did.
His first shot was thru his driver side window into the passenger side window of her car.
That is proof that she wasn’t pointing her car at him about to ram him.
He claims that he fired because he feared Silva would injure him or someone else.
This was a judgment call.
It is not a normal police shooting.
Officer White’s judgment is in question.
Because Officer White’s decision resulted in a wounded a woman and her young son, the validity of his decision to fire needs to be questioned.
A jury should decide if White’s actions were reasonable. No matter what you think of his actions, I believe that most people would agree that his decision to start shooting needs to be looked at.
Mark, you keep talking about how bad Silva is.
I agree with you.
I never made any excuses for her.
She should be tried by a jury and convicted of whatever charges can be brought against her.
Just in case you missed the question,
If a civilian did exactly what Officer White did, don’t you think that person would be charged?
If a civilian did exactly what Officer White did, don’t you think that person would be charged?
If a civilian did exactly what Officer White did, don’t you think that person would be charged?
If a civilian did exactly what Officer White did, don’t you think that person would be charged?
Your smokescreen isn’t fooling anyone. You want to yammer on about Silva and pretend that I have defended her in some way.
You aren’t fooling anyone.
Everyone can see that you are obviously some kind of policeman making excuses for a cowardly policeman who shot a woman and her child.
You wouldn’t shoot a woman and child just because you thought there was a chance your car might be hit by another car, would you?
A little child?
You would shoot a little child just because you thought that you might be in danger?
Wouldn’t you give the little boy more of a chance than that?
Or would you do what White did and start shooting a little boy saying “I thought I was in danger so I shot the little boy and his mom”?
What a coward.
You are growing tiresome.
1. You have done nothing but defend Rachel Silva. In order to believe Officer White is guilty, you must believe that Silva is an innocent. You refuse to discuss her behavior, because it undermines your conclusions.
2. “her little boy was shot” … yea BECAUSE OF HER IRRESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR. You keep pointing out that he was shot; you refuse to accept the fact that he would not have been in danger if Silva had been obeying the law. You also keep acting as if Officer White was out hunting for Bambi that night. Again you refuse to think logically, clearly, or rationally because it does not support your preconceived notions about cops … actually jaundiced view of cops, and your preconceived notions about what happened. You got all whipped up about “her little boy was shot”, and refuse to understand why. It’s easier to hate, than to think.
3. You accept at face value the words of a known liar/criminal/pot-head/drunk — beyond that just her actions on that day make her unreliable at best — ; yet an officer, who as far as I can see has an unblemished record is guilty and must immediately be tried and convicted. Even worse you either can’t comprehend, or you just don’t care that what you advocate is wholly unconstitutional and the EXACT behavior of which you are accuse the cops. Guess it’s o.k. for you to do that?
4. Let’s think your way — I know you will ignore this, as you always do — If by not being arrested immediately, Officer White is escaping “Justice”; then by the same logic so is Silva. Do you think YOU would have been allowed to run around free for 3 months, whipping up the press, cop-haters, and dopers into a frenzy if you have been at the scene of a shooting with pot in your car, a BAT of almost 2 — sorry don’t remember the exact number — and you were in violation of your Bail Order? Hmm, well? Why is it that you can not see how that is wrong, but your fantasy world rules say it’s wrong when a cop is given the same treatment.
I don’t talk about how “bad” she is, I talk about her behavior. Oh and when she goes to court to testify in your fantasy trial of Officer White; she gets to explain why she was violation numerous laws, a Bail Order, and why she put her son in danger ON THAT NIGHT. She then gets to explain why she can’t remember anything other than what makes her case look good. She also gets to explain why her past behavior is exactly the same as the behavior in which she was engaged on that night. You refuse to accept that; I don’t.
Until someone respectable … i.e. NOT A POTHEAD DRUNK VIOLATING THE LAW … comes along to refute his testimony; I side with him.
Oh and why do you think it’s an insult to be a cop? Because you hate cops, of course. Just because someone can see that Rachel Silva is at fault here, does not make him a cop. Nor is it an insult to be one. Only in your world is it an insult. That would be the world of criminals, as I can think of no other that would think in that way.
You keep repeating the same ol’ tunes. None of them are correct, logical, or even well thought out. I am not a cop, and have told you so repeatedly. As usual you choose to ignore the facts.
Oceanside PD does things I don’t like; however in their defense, I have rarely seen them behave unprofessionally or get out of line. Does it happen, I am sure it does; does not make them evil. If Rachel Silva’s past is not an issue, then neither is the Police’s past. Again, you can not have it both ways.
You like many people use the rhetorical device of repetition and insult. No one but the criminals is buying into it.
You will no doubt continue the ‘bleeding heart’ line of “it’s about the children” because you see it work on a daily basis with which to destroy our country by creation of idiotic new programs; it won’t fly here. Few people with any sense are buying into that line. It also proves how weak is your argument.
You are really starting to show your colors.
You are defending a policeman who got excited in a road rage incident and shot a woman and little boy.
Officer White is a Coward.
Once again you repeat your mantra “Officer White is a coward.” with no proof to back it up. Frankly there is more proof that he is not.
There is, however far more proof that Rachel Silva is guilty of multiple crimes, a desperate criminal looking to stay out of jail by lying about what happened, a liar, a pot-head, a drunk, and a danger to herself/society/her son; not that you care about him or us or her.
You don’t have the balls to rethink your entrenched position. You hate cops, and that’s all that matters. You, like the Democrats think you can just keep telling the lies and everyone is stupid enough to believe them because you keep spouting them.
By the way, just what do you do for a living, Mr. Hero? Collect a welfare check? Or do they have Internet access in Prison, now? And why don’t you use your real name? I do, Officer White does, you don’t. Hmm. Interesting.
Oh and if her case is so strong against Officer White, then why have 2 attorneys dumped her? Simple, they know she has no case and she is a liablilty in any lawsuit. Oh the boy’s case? Well that is simple, he is a sympathy appeal. All they have to do is scream “child shot” and the brains in this county lock up like an un-oil machine. They think they have a lock on a bounty. I hope the idiots that run the city of San Diego have the balls to tell the shysters to get bent.
The proof that Officer White is a coward is that he started shooting in a situation that did not require gunfire.
Did he have a legal right to defend himself if he was being attacked with a deadly weapon?
Yes, if he was being attacked by a deadly weapon he had the right to defend himself.
Can an automobile be a deadly weapon?
Yes it can.
So his case comes down to deciding if it was reasonable for White to believe he was in danger that required deadly force.
I believe it would be fair to allow a jury to decide that question.
Would a private citizen be charged for doing exactly what White did?
I believe a private citizen would be charged.
I hope that White is charged. Then he can have his day in court before a fair jury.
Your continuous blather about Silva claiming that somehow I want her to get off with no punishment is nothing but a red herring.
Silva is in serious trouble and she will probably get jail time and lose custody of her son.
It’s too bad she acted the way she did.
But it’s also too bad that White started shooting before it was warranted. Had he held his fire the police would have come and taken Silva to jail and Mr. and Mrs. White would then have gone about their business at Lowe’s
White was cowardly in shooting the mother and young son. He didn’t have to do so. He could have taken a chance and waited until shooting was without question the right thing to do.
But instead, he started shooting into a car that was right beside his.
I don’t see how White will convince a jury that the little boy had to be shot just because White was afraid.
Mark,
I have no legal schooling, nor will I try to sound like i do. That being said, I do wonder why you so stringently defend the position of this police officer. I know they do a great deal to protect all of us. I freely admit that their job is thankless, stressful, and severely underpaid. I also readily admit that most people can’t stand/dont trust the police unless and until they need a cop. Then it’s an entirely different story.
I won’t waste anyone’s time trying to defend Ms. Silva. I really don’t have enough information regarding either her or Officer White to try to “pass judgment” on either of them. And I won’t waste any time trying to convict either of them for the same reason.
But I do really want to know what makes you think that either of them was justified in their behavior. Drunk drivers and road rage jerks bug the hell out of me, too. So do people who tailgate, leave the scene of an accident, or talk on their cell phones as they do 45 on the freeway. But I have never, and will never, pull out a gun and shoot one of them.
Since you seem to be aware of the facts surrounding this situation, I would ask you to please enlighten us all. Give us all the benefit of your wisdom in such things and tell us all why you feel the shooting was justified. Because after sitting here and reading all of your rants toward “Always Right” the only thing I have heard is your opinion of Ms. Silva. Do you really believe that if someone breaks the law, it is okay for them to be shot? How do you know whether or not Officer White participated, or didn’t, in this road rage incident? Are you assuming to know this or were you there?
And while we’re at it, was it “justifiable” for the off duty police officer to shoot Steve Foley in September 2006? (http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/chargers/20060904-9999-1m4foleyshot.html)
Look, I’m not a “cop hater” so let’s not go there. I have friends on the police force. (I’m also not a liberal nor am I a democrat.) But I do have ALOT of questions regarding the use of deadly force by our police department. I also question the forethought of firing a handgun through the passenger window of a car driven by a woman with her young child in the front seat. Before you rant, I’m not saying that it’s anything other than poor judgment. You claim to be a reasonable person. Would you do that? Or would you drive away and call the police? Would you put your wife in that situation or would you take her where she would be safe and call for back up?
Have you ever been “attacked” by someone in a road rage incident? Have you ever seen anyone attacked in a road rage incident? I’m not implying it doesn’t happen. I think we all know it does. But has it ever happened to you? Or better yet, have you ever been asked to step out of your car at gun point and forced to lay face first on the ground? How about this. Have you ever been “profiled”? Do you have ANY experience with the police other than your support for them?
Look, I support our men and women in blue, too. They do a lot, get paid a little, and get little or no respect. Do they deserve better? Hell Yes! Do they have one of the most hated jobs in this country? Yes, they most likely do. Do they deserve our support and respect? Yes they do. But does that give any one of them the right to shoot a woman and her child over a road rage incident? I’m not saying Silva is an angel, nor am I implying that she didn’t do anything wrong. But is what she did really justification for shooting her? Do you really believe that? Because I just can’t seem to get my arms around it at all.
Interesting how you attempt to tie irrelevant events together as if they have any bearing on each other. Foley and Silva have only one thing in common; they are drunk losers who fucked up their lives and now want to blame someone else. Sadly they have many fellow travelers, all too eager to assist them.
Manskar is very gung ho. He has been honored by M.A.D.D.; an org I think is dangerous to the point of being out of control.
Did he violate procedure, he may have. I do wonder though why the opening argument for the plaintiff (Foley) was based not upon the Coronado procedures, but upon P.O.S.T. [for those who don't know, all cops in California are trained to the same basic standard known as P.O.S.T.]. It strikes me as odd that the plaintiff did not use the Coronado procedures to illustrate “proper procedure”. It’s possible that Coronado uses only the P.O.S.T., however I doubt it.
Also California Police Officers have jurisdiction in all parts of the state. It is not unusual for PD from say Oceanside to assist Carlsbad, or San Diego PD to assist Coronado or Chula Vista. Crossing county lines is not unusual, either. Having said that most cops do try to stay within their agency boundaries.
I will say this about Mansker, unlike Foley is has manned up and said he made mistakes. Foley (like Rachel Silva) needs to man up and take responsibility for his stupidity. Both would not be shot if they had not been drinking and driving. A fact that eludes many.
I am not defending Officer White, I am sticking up for Citizen White from the media generated frenzy and hype. I am merely pointing out what so few here want to admit. The vast majority of people here only see “a child was shot” and are looking to blame someone other than the mother so they can all feel better. This irrational thought process is stunning.
Not sure what you are reading, as I have been quite clear to date why I think he is right and she is wrong. Until I see some proof of him being in the wrong, I see no reason to destroy his life. If there is proof he did something wrong, fine I will gladly complain about it. Till such time, I am not going to join the irrational mob with their pyres seeking vigilante justice.
I have no reason to believe that Rachel Silva is capable of anything other than criminal behavior. She has proved as much to date.
Beyond that, common sense and an ability to see people for what they are have made it quite easy to see who to side with in the Silva and White altercation. I didn’t have to see her priors to know she was in the wrong. Observation was all I needed. It if looks like duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck; it’s a damn duck.
Yea, no bias there. Clearly you have thought this through and decided that someone pointing their car at you and then
pulling the triggeraccelerating toward you after threatening you is the same as some dumb-ass on the road driving slowly. Yea, not bias there.You know what bugs me? People who can’t be honest about their opinions, people who pretend to be “even handed” when in fact they are biased. People who don’t’ have the balls to just say I think he overreacted and this is why.
“the forethought”? You sound like alwaysright. Didn’t you say you don’t know any of the facts? Yet here you are describing not only timeline, but firing sequence, position of the parties involved, AND you claim to know what he could or could not see. Amazing. Worse still you claim that he maliciously executed a planned attack upon her. Another load of crap that has been covered here.
No I don’t. I claim to be a reasoned man; there is a difference.
If he was just a citizen would you even be asking these questions? Seems odd so many think cops have no right to self-defense, and must be immediately presumed guilty no matter the circumstance. The criminal on the other hand is automatically considered a Saint — especially if a child is involved — and no one questions their behavior, no matter how bizarre/guilty/ridiculous/criminal.
If her son had not been in the car, would you even give a crap? No! — spare me the “yes I would”, it’s bull and you know it — you would not care about this case, at all.
“Oh but a child was involved.” Yea because Rachel Silva chose to put her son in danger AGAIN.
BTW, for someone who says they are not a liberal/dem you spent a lot of time spewing the same lines as they do. I especially like the insinuation that I have not had to deal with cops other than — I suppose — tea parties and fundraisers. The implication is that I am out of touch with street reality; libs love that one.
Beyond that, you and the pro-Silva crowd calling this a “road rage” incident shows either your bias or you dangerous ignorance. It sounds like bias to me. Also comparing your experience — as if it’s anywhere near what happened to White and therefore makes your judgements sound — is nothing but a way to justify your obvious anti-White stance.
You say they deserve our respect and support, right after you have done everything you can — without coming right out and doing it — to call into question his actions as an indictment of cops altogether.
You say that I did or said this, and then claim ignorance of the entire subject. Seems someone is trying to play “gotcha”.
posted at 0200, no doubt i will have revise this in the morning as I can barely stay awake.
Last I read, Silva was not being charged with assault.
If she isn’t to be charged with assault, how can White claim that she needed to be shot?
The question of who was right and who was wrong is a red herring.
I believe Silva was wrong and I believe White was wrong.
The fact that White was wrong is demonstrated by the bullet hole in the child’s leg.
The best that can be said for White shooting the little boy is that he shot the boy by accident. Even if you give him that, he is still wrong, and the accidental shooting of a child would bring charges on any ordinary citizen.
And I still contend that any private citizen who acted as White did in this situation would already be charged with a crime.
White had no need to shoot to kill when he did. He may be able to show that under department rules he was authorized to shoot to kill.
But he in no way needed to shoot at that time to save his life.
White is a coward and he is using a coward’s excuse to justify his shooting of a mother and little child.
When this case goes to civil court, White and the City will see what the people think of this.
“During the investigation, California Department of Justice agents reviewed 2,500 pages of documents, including an accident reconstruction report. The circumstances surrounding Rachel Silva’s car striking Officer Frank White’s car were insufficient for the filing of a charge of assault with a deadly weapon or any other assault charge against Rachel Silva. ”
http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1570
INSUFFICIENT, didn’t say she was INNOCENT. I realize this is your only “victory” and you are going to trumpet it to this hills as “PROOF” she in the right; however those of us with a brain know differently.
If you recall I said that the AG would not charge her. Also, not being charged does not mean innocent. I realize this is beyond your comprehension, as it’s quite a complex issue; hoping you can come to grips with it soon though.
Ah yes, once again we get the repetition of the same ol bomb throwing. He’s a coward! you say, yet you don’t say why? COWARDS ARE AFRAID TO TAKE ACTION WHEN IN DANGER, dumb-ass. Funny, if he is a coward, and took action; then he must not be a coward. What say you o’ great repetitious orator?
In case you didn’t get what I just said: A COWARD RUNS FROM DANGER.
You really are a tool, aren’t you? Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were murdered … oh wait no they weren’t O.J. got off, remember? Last year numerous Unsolved Murders took place. However we can now wipe them off the books because your logic says they never happened because no one was charged. No doubt you will advocate investigating the police for having the nerve to call these murders, and to have investigated at all!
I realize you think you are being cute, and intelligent; you are not. Most everyone here knows that being charged is not a determinant of guilt. If she had been charged you would have said: “innocent until proved guilty”. Then you would have continued to repeat your trite and invalid points; such as “coward”, “unjustified”, “road rage” and on and on and on.
Do you have ANY intelligent things to say? If so, PLEASE do so. Maybe Paul can help you out, he at least took the time to put some effort into his questions. You are like a broken record.
The fact that she isn’t being charged with any kind of assault doesn’t make Silva innocent of all the other charges.
She is charged with a number of crimes including felony child endangerment.
From where I sit, I think she is guilty of all of those charges.
The importance of her not being charged with any assault on Officer White is that he can’t easily claim that he was assaulted.
OJ Simpson was charged with murder. He beat the charge. I think any reasonable observer could see how he beat the charge. That kind of thing happens sometimes.
I don’t like it, you don’t like it, but it happens.
But remember, OJ was charged and he went on trial.
That’s all I want to see in the case of Officer White. I want him to go to trial and let a jury decide if his actions were reasonable.
If he doesn’t face a jury we will never hear the whole case and the people will never get to let the police know what we think about this case.
All I want to see is Officer White in front of a jury, just as any ordinary citizen would be if they had fired a gun in answer to the rear view mirrors coming in contact.
Yes, That’s the only contact that was made between the cars, just rear view mirrors.
That’s all it took to get the brave policeman to shoot a little boy and his mom.
Mark,
Okay. Now let’s get right to brass tacks on this one. If I read this all right, (and I’m not perfect so if I missed something I’m sure you’ll be happy to point it out), Officer White pointed his gun through the driver’s side window of his car, into the passenger side window of her car, and fired. At the time of this, he had no knowledge of her past DUI convictions. All he had to base his decision to shoot upon was what? Because I’m really trying to understand this, despite your claims to the contrary. I don’t want to rush to convict anyone. I don’t want to even judge anyone. I just want to understand. You make whatever you want from that.
I’m not trying to attach you, Mark. I’m asking you an honest question. Now, you seem to think I’m questioning your intelligence. I’m not. I’m questioning how you have come to the conclusion you have so obviously come to and have chosen to staunchly defend. Do you have insight into this situation that you’re not sharing? How do you seem to know what transpired? How do you know that this incident was justified? How do you know the cause of the whole thing wasn’t Officer White? How do you know what happened and no one else seems to? Please share your insider information with me. Because from what I understand, she was BESIDE him in a parking lot. Now, I freely admit that I am not an expert on road rage, but all I can see happening when someone is beside you, would be them opening their door and denting yours. Now if my information is incorrect, I’m sure you will set me straight. Until such time, I fail to see the “fear for his life” to which you continually refer. Is a car a weapon? Yep. It can be. Was it in this case? I don’t know. But it sure doesn’t seem to have been when the shooting started.
Now you are entitled to your opinion, whatever that may be. I’m not necessarily calling your opinion into question, so much as I am trying to understand it.
Paul,
No he did not point the handgun through the window of his car, OR her car. He had to fire through his window — as in the pane of glass or whatever it is made of — the bullet that hit her son went through the passenger door window.
[I seem to remember from the video I saw that the hole was in the door, looking to find the video][found the images, the bullet that hit the kid went through the window just above the door, and slighty behind the mirror. Now that I look at those pics again, it seems as if she turned the car and used her son as a shield. I will have to look at the video again of her backing up.]Silva’s car has tinted windows that make it difficult to see into the vehicle. A local station attempted to make it appear otherwise by pointing a camera light directly into the vehicle from just beyond the hood. Only the most idiotic were fooled by that.
As for how I have decided to believe him over her, simple; I have been around enough criminals to know how they behave. Beyond that, police are trained to recognize drunks and druggies; so it didn’t matter whether he knew her past. I only point out her past to show that she is not the angel so many want to make her out to be. I am amazed that so many side with her knowing what a crappy “mother” is she.
She was arrested in Decemer for her SECOND DUI and was out on bail pending sentencing after pleading guilty in January. This means she was not allowed to drink, that’s one of the requirements of bail. Oh and no drugs, also. When she was arrested for her first DUI she had her son in the car and had crashed into a tree in Temecula. She told the cop that she was rushing her son to the hospital because he had stopped breathing while they were at a friend’s house. Her excuse this time for driving drunk with her son is that he was at a friend’s house and no one could pick him up. Maybe she needs to stop going to friend’s houses?
Anyway, it’s pretty clear that she decided to escalate the attack. She followed White’s car, yelling and screaming at him. He yelled back, and then she decided to get violent, or more violent.
The kicker is that she refuses to give a statement to authorities. She claimed on TV that she doesn’t remember anything but being shot and calling 911 and her son saying:”He’s got a gun!”. Well if you don’t remember anything, then give them a statement saying so. Until she does, I see no reason to give her the benefit of the doubt on anything. Oh I almost forget, she says she was NOT drunk or High — funny how she remembers NOT being drunk or high — on that night. Her BAC was twice the legal limit, and that was about 2 hours after the incident. She also had trace amounts of marijuana in her system.
You see the problem? She says all the things a guilty person would say, and then is proved a liar. She also understands the system, and like many ‘jail house lawyers’ is working to keep her ass out of prison. Seen this many a time.
At twice the legal level, assuming she can metabolize at the normal rate — .015/hr and most do — it would take almost 11 hours for her to clear her system of the alcohol. It takes approx 40 to 70 minutes from the first drink to reach a MEASURABLE level of BAC.
To give you an idea of what it takes to get that blasted: a 120lb person would need to consume over a 3 hour period either: 6 to 7 Margaritas, or 3 to 4 Black Russians, or 8 glasses of table wine, or 7 to 8 12oz beers, or 20 to 22 low alcohol beers, or 3 Canadian 500mL 10% beers, or 5 to 6 airline miniatures. Well, you get the point. Someone 200lbs would be just under the common legal max (.08) drinking one of the items form that list. Women get drunk faster than men. Oh and I believe her drink of choice is Tequila.
The euphoria of drinking peaks at about .05BAC, then starts to decline. Someone at .08 would feel neutral but impaired. At .1BAC a deeper depression sets in, and at .15BAC — where Silva was at — depression and dysphoria — think misearable drunk — sets in. This is when fights occur, or worse.
You see, you don’t have to have a blood test, or a breath-a-lyzer to know if someone is drunk. Along those lines you can tell when a situation is about to get out of hand. Guilty is as guilty does.
” I am amazed that so many side with her knowing what a crappy “mother” is she.”
You continue to miss the point.
Silva was not innocent. far from it. She was drunk and perhaps high and she may have been the total cause of the whole incident.
She was endangering her son.
But she didn’t do anything that required Officer White to shoot her or her son,
White claims tinted windows prevented him from seeing the little boy.
So that means White fired five shots into a car when he couldn’t see what was inside the car.
There was no ramming of anyone. There was contact between the side mirrors of the cars.
That caused White to shoot through his driver side window glass into Silva’s passenger side window.
This is proof that the cars were side by side when White opened fire.
He was not about to be rammed and he had not been rammed.
He had no reason to shoot to kill when he did. His only defense for his actions is to claim that he was in fear for his life.
And the only way to determine if White’s claim of fear is a reasonable excuse for shooting a mother and son will be for White to go before a jury just as any other citizen would have to do.
White must be charged and have his day in court.
No alwayswrong you miss the point. You have decided that she gets a pass because her son was shot, EVEN THOUGH IT’S HER FAULT.
She was DRUNK AND HIGH. She was out of control. She is behaving EXACTLY like a guilty person behaves. She has not done ONE THING that an innocent person would do. Contrast that to Officer White and his wife’s behavior. They didn’t lawyer up and threaten lawsuits. They didn’t lie about being drunk and high. They didn’t lie about “not remembering”.
Alwayswrong, PROVE she did not provoke the attack. You keep running that line of b.s. and have yet to show one reason why anyone should listen to it.
Once again you twist words in a desperate attempt to make people believe that something happened in reality that did not. You ask illogical questions based upon you leaps of fancy in the vain hope that your “brilliance” will keep people from seeing how idiotic are you conclusions/”facts”/comparisons.
You keep saying he knew this, and he knew that, and she was not gonna do this, and she was just trying to get away. PROVE IT. We are all waiting for you to say something that makes sense.
No it’s not. No country on earth has that system, except Communist/Dictator-run countries who put on show trials. Which is exactly what you want.
You hate cops, you don’t trust the system, and you want to short circuit it in hopes of slamming another cop. That or you are a hippie still stuck in the 60s on an acid flashback. Yea, not much difference. You think you can keep parroting the same old bull-crap and people are stupid enough to believe it. They are not.
No one here is fooled by your bomb throwing or non sequiter leaps.
Silva has already been charged with crimes in this incident.
You keep insisting that I somehow think she is not guilty.
You are not making much sense there. She is guilty and should be punished.
How can you ignore that statement?
White started shooting before any attack occurred. White may have thought he was going to be attacked and that may have led him to believe that his life was in danger.
But White may have been mistaken. Silva may not have been about to ram his car.
I don’t believe that the law allows me to shoot anyone who I feel may be a threat to me.
There must be a reasonable threat.
I feel that White’s decision to start shooting is questionable.
I believe that a jury should be presented with the facts in court.
Silva will have a chance to make excuses to a jury for her behavior in this incident.
I think White deserves the same opportunity.
If a jury believes he acted in a reasonable manner then he will be exonerated.
Going to trial will not be sidestepping any judicial process. In order to charge White and take him to court, the prosecutor will have to take the case before a grand jury.
If we see White charged in this case it will be because the grand jury voted to charge him.
How can I ignore a statement you only recently made? Am I supposed to congratulate you on finally admitting that she “may” be the cause? I think not.
You said: THE ONLY WAY FOR THE TRUTH TO COME OUT IS TO TAKE HIM TO TRIAL. Now you say you are not short circuiting the system. Just curious, is this how you live you life? Ignoring the obvious to placate your feelings based biases? If the only way to get the truth is to go to trial; that means that the police, the DA, “Grand Jury”, and the AG have no say in the matter. Our system says they do, if you remove that authority then they have no reason to exist. I can’t make it any more clear than that. What you advocate IS NOT our system, it’s a show trial to make people like you feel better. You feeling better is NOT the issue or of any import.
Maybe you are desperately trying to salvage your argument, then again, it doesn’t sound much different than before. Same ol’ crap, different day.
Someone pointing a car at you and threatening you with that car, is a reasonable threat. Oh and the law says: It is lawful for a person being assaulted to defend himself or herself from attack if he or she has reasonable grounds for believing, and does in fact believe, that he or she will suffer bodily injury.
Let me reflect upon my own run in with a car. Hit at 30 miles an hour; I was catapulted almost 20 yards, blacked out 3 times IN THE AIR, the last for almost 20 minutes, suffered a severe concussion from hitting the ground, I then spent a year rehabbing my knee and back and on pain killers, to this day I walk with a limp and still have knee pain. If I had not seen the car coming and tried to leap over the hood, I no doubt would have been if far worse shape. Yea, no reason to believe a car can do any damage.
Yea, maybe she was backing so she could find her gun and shoot him? [no, she didn't have a gun, that we know of; as you have pointed out there is no way he could have known she DIDN'T have one] Maybe she was backing up to let out the homies in the back? Maybe she was going to get her crow bar out of her trunk?
Like I said, how many people can she kill, or maim, or injure before you think it’s o.k. to shoot her?
Doesn’t matter if he was mistaken, if he believed she was threat; then he was justified. The only people who are saying he wasn’t is those who clearly hate cops, and will not use their brains. OK maybe they have burned out their brains with the pot and the booze and the 60’s free-for-all.
~~Self Defense at Nolo Law Glossary
some people who will no doubt agree with your view that anyone engaged in self-defense is a criminal
Alwayswrong, you like liberals live in a fantasy world where someone is always to blame — usually the same government you expect us to turn over more of our freedoms to — , even if it’s an accident. If a favored “minority” — kids, women, criminals, blacks, Hispanics — are the “victim”; then by God the “man” is to blame and the loons come out of the woodwork to protest, blame, lie, deny, and shake-down everyone in sight. Doesn’t matter what the facts are, just matters they get some face time on TV to spew their talking points and sow division amongst the people. They, like you don’t care if they destroy someone’s life or livelihood; hell they believe they are doing a service for destroying them, and they feel good about it. The stood up to the man!
We don’t live in a perfect world. There are no perfect outcomes, and sometimes bad things happen. In many cases they are deserved. If the justice system actually put people in prison for crimes — oh there I go again demanding criminals pay for their crimes, how dare I! — , and made drunks and druggies sober up or face substantial prison time — we do have lots of wildfires that need to be fought, roads to be built, roadways to be cleared — , and lefties didn’t whine and complain every time a criminal was hurt; we would have a pretty safe country.
You want to blame White for what is Silva’s responsibility. The more we learn about her, the more reasonable his actions seem. Granted they were pretty strong before. Americans have become so sissified that we second guess everything because we are afraid someone might get offended. Pathetic.
“Americans have become so sissified that we second guess everything because we are afraid someone might get offended.”
Mark,
Now you’re talking! I could not agree with that statement any more than if I had said it myself.
I’m not sure about this whole shooting incident, though. I do appreciate you taking the time to explain your thought process instead of wasting it by attack