"Joan Moyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hello Len,
I formed that opinion from the trial publicity at the time. Wasn't that
part of the evidence used by the defense? Did King deny resisting? I
don't have any transcripts.
Joan
----------
> From: Leonard Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Rodney King (was L&I Back Home)
> Date: Tuesday, April 28, 1998 6:57 PM
>
> Leonard Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Hi Joan
>
> There was no evidence that Rodney King "attacked" the officers or, even
for
> that matter, physically resisted arrest after the car stopped. What is
it
> that makes you think he did those things?
>
> Len
>
>
>
>
>
> At 01:57 PM 4/26/1998 -0400, you wrote:
> >"Joan Moyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> >Hello Kathy,
> >
> >I recall your post about LAPD training. Hopefully it has improved with
> >time and with the exposure that police force has received. I believe
when
> >it is necessary to subdue a prisoner attempting to avoid capture or to
> >escape or to prevent that individual from harming someone, then force
must
> >be used. I believe King needed to be subdued as he did not succumb to
> >capture willingly. The line appears to be at what point King was under
> >control and how much physical force was still used when it was
unnecessary.
> > I believe there was abuse and that was wrong. On the other hand, I do
not
> >excuse King for the part he played. Had he not behaved as he did, a
high
> >speed chase would have been avoided and had he not resisted arrest and
> >attacked the officers, no force would have been necessary. However, I
> >certainly distinguish between necessary force and abuse. Abuse is not
> >acceptable on the part of the criminal or the police. I understand your
> >point. :)
> >
> > Joan
> >
> >
> >----------
> >> From: Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: L&I Back Home
> >> Date: Sunday, April 26, 1998 1:16 PM
> >>
> >> Kathy E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Joan :)
> >>
> >> I disagree with you :) If you remember a couple of years ago I stated
> >> that the problem was in the training of the LAPD according to their
> >> training they were following the procedures used at the time. OTOH
that
> >> does not lift the responsibility off of the officers and what they
did,
> >> nor does it lift the responsibility off of RK and what he did.
> >>
> >> Joan Moyer wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Joan Moyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> >
> >> > Hello Vi,
> >> >
> >> > Glad the surgery was successful. I had a house on the market once
for
> >a
> >> > year and it was a real worry since I had bought another. Glad to
read
> >your
> >> > posts. We are probably the only 2 who believe King had to be
subdued
> >and
> >> > the officers were not totally at fault.
> >> >
> >> > Joan
> >> >
> >> --
> >> Kathy E
> >> "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and
tomorrow
> >> isn't looking too good for you either"
> >> http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law & Issues Mailing List
> >> http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories
> >> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
> >
> >Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
> >
> >
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
