"I want Jesus" "I want Jesus"

[techs]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15496090/

JERSEYVILLE, Ill. - A teenager carrying a Bible and shouting "I want Jesus" was shot twice with a police stun gun and later died at a St. Louis hospital, authorities said.

In a statement obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, police in Jerseyville, about 40 miles north of St. Louis, said 17-year-old Roger Holyfield would not acknowledge officers who approached him and he continued yelling, "I want Jesus."

Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative, according to the statement. Officers fired the stun gun at him after he ignored their warnings, then fired again when he continued struggling, police said.

Holyfield was flown to St. Louis' Cardinal Glennon Hospital after the confrontation Saturday; he died there Sunday, police said.



Its a tragedy. I think?

 

[OrganizedChaos]

suicide by cop perhaps?

 

[Enig101]

He sounds like a nutcase. However, the more important thing to take away from this news is that "stun-guns" are dangerous. Their use really needs to be reviewed/reconsidered.

 

[hellokeith]

He goes to heaven, and the Cops have one less issue. Win-Win.

 

[magomago]

Wow that is sad. I still don't see why they needed to shoot him with a stun gun...just apphrend him and be done with it. Although I appreciate law enforcement, I know they want to play and use all their "tools" and "toys" so we need to be vigilant about the type of gear they have to "subdue" people...

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Originally posted by: techs
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15496090/

JERSEYVILLE, Ill. - A teenager carrying a Bible and shouting "I want Jesus" was shot twice with a police stun gun and later died at a St. Louis hospital

Hallellujah!

 

[brandonb]

Yeah, shouting "I want Jesus" is a crime. I'd say he was fairly harmless.

Nice world we live in.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Well, all things considered, the victim probably got the final proof that Darwin was correct, and intelligent design is not 🙂

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Well, all things considered, the victim probably got the final proof that Darwin was correct, and intelligent design is not 🙂

Ah..so its ok for the Police to kill people when they aren't threatened.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: magomago
Wow that is sad. I still don't see why they needed to shoot him with a stun gun...just apphrend him and be done with it.

"Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative"

Granted the article doesn't go into more detail about what Holyfield did, but I don't think we can assume that the police took out their stun guns just for the fun of it at this point.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: brandonb
Yeah, shouting "I want Jesus" is a crime. I'd say he was fairly harmless.

Nice world we live in.

It sounds to me like the person was a disturbance, and the police tried to calm him down. He became combative and the police took action. If true, I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Well, all things considered, the victim probably got the final proof that Darwin was correct, and intelligent design is not 🙂

Ah..so its ok for the Police to kill people when they aren't threatened.

The article does say the person was "combative" doesn't it? It's not like the police shot the person in the head either. The person ended up dead, but we can't assume the intention of the police officers was to kill.

 

[OrganizedChaos]

Originally posted by: CellarDoor

Originally posted by: magomago
Wow that is sad. I still don't see why they needed to shoot him with a stun gun...just apphrend him and be done with it.

"Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative"

Granted the article doesn't go into more detail about what Holyfield did, but I don't think we can assume that the police took out their stun guns just for the fun of it at this point.

if they whacked him with a baton and died of a concusion people would scream police brutality.
if they pepper sprayed him and killed a nearby asmatic people would scream negligence,
if they shot him people would scream excessive force.
if they used a dog and he got an infection and died people would call for the end of k9 units

theres no winning in these kind of situations, Joh Q. Public isn't happy unless they see a cop getting his ass kicked.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: CellarDoor

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Well, all things considered, the victim probably got the final proof that Darwin was correct, and intelligent design is not 🙂

Ah..so its ok for the Police to kill people when they aren't threatened.

The article does say the person was "combative" doesn't it? It's not like the police shot the person in the head either. The person ended up dead, but we can't assume the intention of the police officers was to kill.

Don't you know, the government secretly wants all its citizens dead. Bush himself probally gave the order to kill him! Its a conspirrraaccccccyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: OrganizedChaos

Originally posted by: CellarDoor

Originally posted by: magomago
Wow that is sad. I still don't see why they needed to shoot him with a stun gun...just apphrend him and be done with it.

"Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative"

Granted the article doesn't go into more detail about what Holyfield did, but I don't think we can assume that the police took out their stun guns just for the fun of it at this point.

if they whacked him with a baton and died of a concusion people would scream police brutality.
if they pepper sprayed him and killed a nearby asmatic people would scream negligence,
if they shot him people would scream excessive force.
if they used a dog and he got an infection and died people would call for the end of k9 units

theres no winning in these kind of situations, Joh Q. Public isn't happy unless they see a cop getting his ass kicked.

You are right, anyone that has ever been in any type of dangerous situation wouldn't be making ignorant comments like magomag

 

[brandonb]

Originally posted by: CellarDoor
It sounds to me like the person was a disturbance, and the police tried to calm him down. He became combative and the police took action. If true, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Roger Holyfield would not acknowledge officers who approached him and he continued yelling, "I want Jesus."

Using common sense 101... He was a disturbance but harmless. Police tried to shut him up, but police were ignored. Police being police didn't just say "Ok, we'll let him go hes harmless." The police probably grabbed him by the arms or something... Of course, causing a reaction in the kid to struggle away, maybe push the police away. Police stun him. He's dead.

I do see something wrong with that. It's not a crime to yell "I want Jesus" walking down the street. In my neighbhorhood I hear much worse being shouted from kids from all over the place... Kids by nature, cause disturbances. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a kid yell outside my house the last week. But I dont' call the cops on them, and I don't expect the cops to stun them for not shutting up, even if I wanted them to be quiet.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: brandonb

Originally posted by: CellarDoor
It sounds to me like the person was a disturbance, and the police tried to calm him down. He became combative and the police took action. If true, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Roger Holyfield would not acknowledge officers who approached him and he continued yelling, "I want Jesus."

Using common sense 101... He was a disturbance but harmless. Police tried to shut him up, but police were ignored. Police being police didn't just say "Ok, we'll let him go hes harmless." The police probably grabbed him by the arms or something... Of course, causing a reaction in the kid to struggle away, maybe push the police away. Police stun him. He's dead.

I do see something wrong with that. It's not a crime to yell "I want Jesus" walking down the street. In my neighbhorhood I hear much worse being shouted from kids from all over the place... Kids by nature, cause disturbances. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a kid yell outside my house the last week. But I dont' call the cops on them, and I don't expect the cops to stun them for not shutting up, even if I wanted them to be quiet.

They stunned him because he was being combative, not because he was yelling. Don't pretend like you know everything that happened, you weren't there and you have no idea. I think it is also interesting that you know the law in the jurisdiction that this happened, have you ever heard of something called "disturbing the peace"?. Most jurisdictions have some variation of this offense.

Unfortunately, Police cannot just simply walk away.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: brandonb

Originally posted by: CellarDoor
It sounds to me like the person was a disturbance, and the police tried to calm him down. He became combative and the police took action. If true, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Roger Holyfield would not acknowledge officers who approached him and he continued yelling, "I want Jesus."

Using common sense 101... He was a disturbance but harmless. Police tried to shut him up, but police were ignored. Police being police didn't just say "Ok, we'll let him go hes harmless." The police probably grabbed him by the arms or something... Of course, causing a reaction in the kid to struggle away, maybe push the police away. Police stun him. He's dead.

I do see something wrong with that. It's not a crime to yell "I want Jesus" walking down the street. In my neighbhorhood I hear much worse being shouted from kids from all over the place... Kids by nature, cause disturbances. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a kid yell outside my house the last week. But I dont' call the cops on them, and I don't expect the cops to stun them for not shutting up, even if I wanted them to be quiet.

You've made assumptions on why the police acted the way they did based on very little detail of the incident in the article. It sounds to me like you've had some previous experiences that you liken to what you read. The article doesn't go into detail about just how combative the person was, so we can't assume he tried to attack the police officers, nor can we assume he simply wiggled his arms to get away when the police grabbed him.

Without any more detail on the incident, I can't say whether using the stun guns on the person was appropriate or not. However, stun guns aren't meant to kill, so the fact that the person did die, is very unfortunate. Simply, these things happen.

 

[brandonb]

Originally posted by: JD50

have you ever heard of something called "disturbing the peace"?. Most jurisdictions have some variation of this offense.

Unfortunately, Police cannot just simply walk away.

Yes, but have you heard of a thing called "Kids at play?" Sure I'm making assumptions of what went on.

There is nothing more irritating to me than having life come down to this:

Work, go home, STFU, pay taxes, watch football on Sunday, repeat. Not necessarily in that order.

Anything out of line from the above, and prepare to get the cops called on you, maybe stunned, get a "disturbing the peace ticket", etc.

Its BS. This kid was what is commonly known as "rejoicing"... He got high on God. It happens. The only peace he disturbed was some crab ass who's life is miserable because they followed their entire life by the motto I mentioned above.

 

[piasabird]

Bring on the Law Suit.

This guy had a Bipolar disorder according to the local news.

Note I live in this area, and work not far from this location. It is just in the next county.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: brandonb

Originally posted by: JD50

have you ever heard of something called "disturbing the peace"?. Most jurisdictions have some variation of this offense.

Unfortunately, Police cannot just simply walk away.

Yes, but have you heard of a thing called "Kids at play?" Sure I'm making assumptions of what went on.

There is nothing more irritating to me than having life come down to this:

Work, go home, STFU, pay taxes, watch football on Sunday, repeat. Not necessarily in that order.

Anything out of line from the above, and prepare to get the cops called on you, maybe stunned, get a "disturbing the peace ticket", etc.

Its BS. This kid was what is commonly known as "rejoicing"... He got high on God. It happens. The only peace he disturbed was some crab ass who's life is miserable because they followed their entire life by the motto I said above.

More assumptions. Look, it could have happened all the way you said it. It could have been that the person was merely rejoicing and then all of the sudden two policemen stunned him with the intention of killing him. That's possible, although unlikely IMO. However, nothing good comes from making the assumption that it did indeed happen, when there isn't much detail on the incident, and the only thing we have to does say that the person was combative.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: brandonb

Originally posted by: JD50

have you ever heard of something called "disturbing the peace"?. Most jurisdictions have some variation of this offense.

Unfortunately, Police cannot just simply walk away.

Yes, but have you heard of a thing called "Kids at play?" Sure I'm making assumptions of what went on.

There is nothing more irritating to me than having life come down to this:

Work, go home, STFU, pay taxes, watch football on Sunday, repeat. Not necessarily in that order.

Anything out of line from the above, and prepare to get the cops called on you, maybe stunned, get a "disturbing the peace ticket", etc.

Its BS. This kid was what is commonly known as "rejoicing"... He got high on God. It happens. The only peace he disturbed was some crab ass who's life is miserable because they followed their entire life by the motto I mentioned above.

And whomever this person was called the cops. Guess what, the cops have to respond, they have to enforce the law. They didn't write this law, but it is their job to enforce it. If they show up on the scene and some kid is yelling then they have to calm him down. I'm not going to go on because I wasn't there and I don't know what happened. If you do not like the law then fine, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the Police Officers that responded to this call.

 

[Lemon law]

Before commenting----I would want more facts----but it is a fact---in rare cases---tasers can kill---but until we have an autopsy--we don't even have a idea on the cause.
All we have now is a co-incidence factor---if it were daylight when it happened, would we blame sunlight?

For all we know, he may have been really high on drugs.---or any number of other factors.

Not apologizing for the cops mind you---but not rushing off to judgment either.

We can be equally productive in speculating what might have happened if they tried to arrest him--or ignore him. Those roads could lead to other problems because Roger could easily be a danger to himself and others.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Bring on the Law Suit.

This guy had a Bipolar disorder according to the local news.

Note I live in this area, and work not far from this location. It is just in the next county.

How were the Police supposed to know that this kid was Bipolar, and what does that have to do with them tasing him? If he was combative then they have every right to protect themselves and use whatever means neccessary. It is very unfortunate that this kid died, but that is not the fault of the Police.

 

[Enig101]

I'm not going to defend the cops or attack them at this point. I'm sure there is an inquiry into the event. In the end I doubt they were using the stun-gun without need.

The problem here is that it killed him when it should have only stunned him. This is just more evidence that stun guns should be reconsidered.