Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Opening Arguments in the Foley Case
Posted by: Dale Franks on Tuesday, June 24, 2008

The opening arguments were held today in the case of Steve Foley's suit against the City of Coronado and Coronado police officer Aaron Mansker. The defense laid out the following argments:
Coronado police Officer Aaron Mansker knew he was careless and in violation of police training standards the morning he shot former Chargers linebacker Steve Foley, according to the officer's deposition, presented at Thursday's opening statements of the civil trial.

Mansker was speeding in his personal vehicle; he did not show a badge to identify himself as an officer; and he ordered Foley to stop instead of following him at a safe distance – all violations of the officer's training, said Harvey Levine, Foley's attorney.

“These policies and procedures are designed to prevent exactly what happened to Mr. Foley,” said Levine, who called the entire incident tragic and “totally unnecessary”.
Meanwhile, the city's attorney told the other side of the story:
Former Chargers linebacker Steve Foley made a series of poor decisions the morning he was shot by an off-duty Coronado police officer, a lawyer representing the city told jurors yesterday.

Among those fateful choices was getting behind the wheel of a customized “muscle car” Sept. 3, 2006, after socializing at a downtown San Diego nightclub, rather than into a limousine the athlete had hired hours earlier.

Foley's blood-alcohol content was measured at 0.21 percent after the shooting, nearly three times the legal limit of .08, said Norman Watkins, who represents the city and Officer Aaron Mansker.

“This man had an awful lot to drink – a staggering amount, a dangerous amount,” Watkins said of Foley on the second day of a civil trial in San Diego Superior Court.
So, the direction of both sides' cases are pretty evident, and no surprise to anyone really.

The district attorney declined to prosecute Mansker for excessive force last year, although, I'm sure that, as the case goes on, the jury will certainly be informed that:
Foley was shot twice in the back of his left knee and hip, injuries that ended his career as a professional athlete.
It's always a mystery to me how suspects end up with bullet wounds in the back, when they are advancing upon the officer. We should probably just assume that Mr. Foley was in the process of throwing a roundhouse kick, and had gotten turned around before the bullets struck him.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I’m always amused to when they characterize someone as so drunk they can barely stand up, then in the same breath also characterize them as a threat to the police officer. Maybe he can pull off the deadly roundhouse-kick to the face while lying on the ground?
 
Written By: ck
URL: http://
Shot in the back of the knee and hip, do they mean the bullet entered perpindicular to the knee or was it a grazing shot to the guy sideways which hit the "back" of his knee. Because the hip is also on your side, unless they really meant butt.
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
Or mayhap Dale, Mansker, in fear for his life engaged the target until a significant change in silhouette was observed or until the target began burning...I believe the tanker mantra. In short, he engaged the target, front, back, and sideways until the target was no longer a threat...do NOT advance on an armed man, whether he’s a cop or a mugger when all you have is ethanol and testosterone...

Mansker deserves punishment, but the other guy is no victim, either...I’d have emptied my magazine into him. His career would be over, still, as would his life.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Joe,

I think Dale’s skepticism is a good thing. Cops shouldn’t be pulling people over when they are out of uniform and pulling guns.
And its tricky to confirm 100% he’s advancing when the bullets are in his back or at least his side.
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
This was a clear violation in police training and procedures for handling situations while off-duty.
Not to mention that Mansker wasn’t even within his own department’s jurisdiction. He should have followed at a safe speed and called 911, like everyone else, to get CHP or local enforcement involved and acted as a witness only. Nothing more.
Anyone can "say" they are a police officer, if he didn’t show a badge, how were they to know he wasn’t a criminal saying he was a policeman as a ploy to steal from them.

The D.A.’s office made a huge mistake not charging Mansker with wrong-doing. This is a bit of a high-profile case in the San Diego area and their lack of charges against Mansker is a black-mark to their reputation and credibility. Good Luck in keeping your D.A. job on the next election.
 
Written By: Alex
URL: http://
Or mayhap Dale, Mansker, in fear for his life engaged the target until a significant change in silhouette was observed...
Yeah.

Too bad he placed himself in that position by defying his department’s policy on off-duty traffic stops, huh? How many people would’ve had to be shot if Mansker had waited for a marked CHP or SDSO unit to make the contact?

I suspect the number would be one less than was actrually shot.
I’d have emptied my magazine into him.
Well, since the policy is always to "use the minimum amount of force neccessary to effect an arrest", that would be a...problematic action.
 
Written By: Dale Franks
URL: http://www.qando.net
When confronting large, drunken, Linebackers, a magazine IS the minimum force I’d employ...BTW, I’m only commenting on your seeming complaint that he got shot, not in the front..my theory is, once the fire fight starts, the law goes out the window. You want to charge Mansker, you want to discipline Mansker, you want to say Mansker is an idiot for getting in this position, no argument from me...but once a large angry intoxicated NFL behemoth advances on him or me...we empty the magazine and if it hits him in the front, side or rear that’s OK...I draw the line at reloading more than two times, though..

In the immortal quote from El Diablo..."You shot him in the back" Lou Gossett Jr., "His back was to me."
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
So Joe, if I understand this correctly: If some random guy stalks you, corners you, and then unloads 3 clips into you, you’re not a victim? After all, you could have been coming at him, and you could have known 30 ways to kill a man with your bare hands.

Also "my theory is, once the fire fight starts, the law goes out the window." That’s an interesting viewpoint when only one person has a gun.

Idiots like Mansker should be banned from ever owning a gun or wearing a badge, he’s gone out of his way to prove that he cannot shoulder the responsibility.
 
Written By: ck
URL: http://
The idiot was the moron with a BAC of .21 who then decided, "Me NFL Behemoth, Me SMASH!" Dude, like I posted earlier if all you have is ethanol and testosterone in the gun fight you lose, whether you are meeting Officer Friendly or Max the Mugger, the GUN WITH THE GUN HAS THE ADVANTAGE! DON’T CHARGE HIM...

Sure some Zipper Head follows me around, yelling and claiming he’s a cop but showing no ID...Well, I’m calling the Policia and driving to the nearest Millicent station. Oh that’s right Foley couldn’t ’cuz he was drunker’n a skunk...Wow, his options were bad, oh well he put himself in that spot didn’t he...
If some random guy stalks you, corners you, and then unloads 3 clips into you, you’re not a victim?
You forgot, you then CHARGE the stalker, that completes the story doesn’t it...makes it a leittle more complex, to recap you are stalked, you are cornered (you drove home, rather than the mall or the police station) and then you get out of your car, confront the stalker and charge him once he produces a gun...and you’re not stupid?
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
I have no problem with the shots in the back. Those can easily come as the target is in the process of falling before it registers that he is no longer a threat.

In spite of that, this yahoo was so far over the line I hope that Foley squeezes him for every cent possible.
 
Written By: Phelps
URL: http://phelps.donotremove.net
First off, whether he claimed he was a cop or not is in disagreement.

Second: Yeah, Foley must have charged the assh*le, that’s why he was shot 3 times in the chest. Oh wait...

Mansker is a dirty inept cop. That anyone even gives his account a modicum of credibility is sad.
 
Written By: ck
URL: http://
You forgot, you then CHARGE the stalker, that completes the story doesn’t it...makes it a leittle more complex, to recap you are stalked, you are cornered (you drove home, rather than the mall or the police station) and then you get out of your car, confront the stalker and charge him once he produces a gun...and you’re not stupid?
Geez, if stupidity was cause for shooting someone, I couldn’t afford all the ammo I would go through in a day.
 
Written By: Phelps
URL: http://phelps.donotremove.net
Geez, if stupidity was cause for shooting someone, I couldn’t afford all the ammo I would go through in a day.


But you only get to shoot the ones who charge you...
Mansker is a dirty inept cop.
Inept, yes...pl;ease provide proof of being "dirty"...was he shaking Foley down...or did he roll Foley and Foley’s companion...Dirty, I doan t’ink that word means what you t’ink it means.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
What would you call someone who routinely flaunts the rules and defies police code? Is that clean? Inept doesn’t begin to describe this guy. Inept would be someone who is an idiot and doesn’t realize they’re doing something wrong. Dirty qualifies someone who knows what they’re doing is wrong and yet pursues that avenue.
 
Written By: ck
URL: http://
He was doing what he thought was RIGHT, CK...as evidenced by the fact that indeed, Foley had a BAC 0f .21..."Dirty" is doing what you know to be wrong, for personal profit...

Inept, yes...Dirty, no...Though Dirty Cop is a nice epithet to toss around.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Joe, how many times has he defied police code? DIRTY! HE KNOWS WHAT HE DID WAS WRONG. You can’t cut it any differently from that.
 
Written By: ck
URL: http://
"we empty the magazine and if it hits him..."

Well, I guess life in prison is better than no life at all.


"Geez, if stupidity was cause for shooting someone, I couldn’t afford all the ammo I would go through in a day."

Amen. But we can dream, can’t we?

"But you only get to shoot the ones who charge you..."

Or if they are rude and impolite (from another thread).


"He was doing what he thought was RIGHT, CK"

Morally right, perhaps, but certainly he knew it was against regulations and the law. I don’t look fondly on folks who wander around with guns looking for opportunities to serve a higher good. They should nail him and the force he rode in on. And may the deity/entity of your choice and faith tradition protect the community if he ever gets a concealed carry permit. Not that he seems overly concerned with obeying the strictures of lesser authorities than his own conscience.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
They should nail him and the force he rode in on.

Heh heh. And hear hear!
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider