23 Years And Counting…

A little over four years ago, I created this blog out of frustration in how my life in the coming future did not look very promising.  I published my first post February 19, 2013, containing the title, Frustrated, But Not Discouraged.  Looking back these past four years a lot has occurred causing my interests to change significantly.  Four years ago I had ambitions in trying to make it in the entertainment industry, but those dreams have drifted to the wayside.  Where I want to go in the coming years is someplace I never imagined myself wanting to go.  But like in the film Finding Forrester Jamal Wallace said, “I figure[d] you were writing about how life never works out.”

Today, being the 23rd anniversary of my accident, I decided it was time for me to write about something different.  The past four years, on this day I wrote about the injustice of the judicial system when it comes to law enforcement.  Specifically, in how I destroyed the absurdity of California vehicle code 17004.7, and why police should not have qualified immunity during police pursuits.*  (If you have some free time, I highly recommend reading those posts, they can be found on my “About” page).

The past four years my posts typically started out the same way with an opening sentence being something like, “Well, another year has gone by, and I am still here…” blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada.  To me that initial sentence is getting boring and repetitive, that is why this post started out different and is going to focus on a slightly different topic.  This blog post is going to be different in how I am not going to talk exclusively about police pursuits and their department corruption.  Instead, it will revolve around my accident, but this time about the criminal who was running from the cop.

***

Twenty-three years ago on Monday, July 11, 1994, an individual by the name of John Eric Phelps did not pull over when a cop tried to issue him a speeding ticket for going 100 mph.  Because Phelps did not stop, the cop initiated a police pursuit that came to a dramatic halt, when Phelps ran a red light — broadsiding our car causing me to become a (C1, C2) quadriplegic.  Little did the officer know, Phelps was driving a stolen vehicle and had an extensive criminal history.

Upon the impact of the crash Phelps who was not injured, immediately got out of his car and fled the scene making this a felony hit and run situation.  Hearing this description may sound pretty bad, but this was not the first time Phelps had a run-in with the law.  Following the accident, due to the circumstances in how it involved: a police pursuit, an individual with a significant criminal record, and it caused serious injuries to me.  The incident was big news drawing attention from major newspapers and the local news.  As a result of this, two (2) days later the Los Angeles Times printed an article that chronicled a good portion of Phelps’ criminal record.

The title of the article read, “Arrestee in Crash That Hurt Boy Has Long Record : Courts: Dana Point parole has been cited six times for driving with a suspended license, has a string of traffic offenses and was imprisoned on a drug conviction.”  The following are some brief exerts of Phelps’ criminal history from the article:

Phelps, 31, of Dana Point also has an eight-year court record that includes a drug felony conviction in Hawaii, a vandalism conviction in Laguna Beach, a string of minor traffic convictions and two civil suits resulting from accidents.



Phelps served two years in prison in Hawaii for cocaine possession in 1990-92, after being arrested at an airport, Lucero said. When his prison term was completed, he asked to be paroled to Orange County, where he was reared.  


At the time of Monday’s collision, Phelps was wanted by state officials for avoiding parole officials after failing a drug test earlier this spring, according to Art Lucero, a Department of Corrections spokesman.


Before this spring, Lucero said “we had a couple of incidents” regarding Phelps’ parole, but nothing serious. Then, in April, Phelps failed a mandatory drug test.



“We got a dirty test from this guy, and he knew it, and he split on us,” avoiding his parole agent, Lucero said. “So we informed Hawaii officials that we lost track of this guy. We were in the process of requesting a warrant.”

And last, but not least Phelps’ father commented:

“Drugs have totally screwed his life up,…This kid came from a good family….It’s a sad situation,…But don’t you ever think this couldn’t happen to you.”



With this criminal history (which is only half the report), how Phelps was even loose on the streets, to begin with, shows a significant problem not only in our judicial system but how it does not “rehabilitate” hardened crimes.  Instead, it is just a vicious cycle of a perpetual money making scheme, which you will see later in this post.

Following my accident, because Phelps fled the scene, a six-hour door-to-door search was conducted before he was found by police.  With Phelps in custody, he was booked and charged on multiple felony accounts where he pleaded guilty, sentencing him to seven years in prison.  The maximum amount of jail time allowed under California vehicle code 2800.3.

Seven years in prison feels like a relatively light sentence when I suffered a permanent lifelong injury for being a “law-abiding citizen,” when Phelps had the criminal history he did.  However, that is the law and it does not look like anything will change in the coming years.  In fact, what really stings and adds insult to injury is from what I understand, Phelps was released after serving only three years in prison.

With Phelps only serving three years in prison for causing a permanent lifelong injury to me, I think to myself every now and then — what would have been the circumstance if the nurse had not been at the right place at the right time to save my life?  Well, according to California vehicle code 2800.3, Phelps would have served a maximum of 10 years in prison if there were no additional charges, but we know that is not the case.  So, with the additional charges Phelps had on his plate, the closest scenario I can find to my accident is the one I briefly mentioned in my post 21 Years And Counting.

Three years ago an individual by the name of Aleksandar Apostolovic led officers of the Westminster police department on a pursuit where he rammed a minivan killing a 12-year-old girl.  Apostolovic fled the scene of the accident and was arrested several hours later making the situation very similar to mine.  Apostolovic has not been tried yet (at least I could not find anything) because he pleaded not-guilty, but he was booked on many of the same charges Phelps was and is looking at a jail sentence of 30 years to life.  For the instance of this post, let us assume Apostolovic gets the lesser sentence — 30 years in prison.

Since this incident is remarkably similar to mine (minus me not getting killed), what I am about to say may sound very negative and depressing, but please do not take it that way, I am just stating the facts.  So, because a nurse happened to witness my accident and gave me mouth to mouth until the paramedics arrived — literally saving my life — Phelps’ sentence was cut by 27 years.  What this ultimately means is me being the “law-abiding citizen” who was an “innocent victim” and suffered a catastrophic injury, I have served a longer sentence than Phelps has and will continue to until the day I die.

Even though I am suffering a harsher punishment than Phelps ever will, the courts did determine he was responsible for all my medical bills.  If you have stumbled upon this blog by Googling my name, then many of you probably think I am incredibly wealthy.  The reason I say that is Googling my name along with the word “accident” causes the top search result to be a Los Angeles Times article containing the title, “Family of Paralyzed Irvine Boy Awarded $38.8 Million.”

Yes, the title of this article is correct, but this judgment was against Phelps and no one else.  If you click the link, the article states, “But an attorney for Trent McGee, 8, said that he and his family probably will never see any of the money because the car thief, John Eric Phelps, is in prison for the July 1994 crash.”  Which is exactly true 23 years later.

The reason I have never received a penny is the situation is a lot like fishing — catch and release.  To this day I have no idea where Phelps is, and in a sense I prefer it to be that way.  However, if I wanted to find Phelps in order to garnish his wages and get some of the judgment issued against him, it would take quite a few steps and a lot of money to do so:

First Step: have my lawyer find him.  Lawyer fee.  Second Step: Have my lawyer talk to his boss to set up a contract to garnish his wages.  Lawyer fee.  Third Step: If Phelps was not a productive member of society at age 31, is he today at 54, and would he have a job that pays more than minimum wage?

I do not know the answer to that last question.  But, if all these steps are taken, all Phelps has to do is quit his job causing the whole process to start over again.  It is precisely a catch and release situation causing the outcome to be a losing one.  The only way I possibly might see any compensation would be if Phelps won the lottery and we all know what the odds of that happening are.

***

Since I did not receive a massive settlement and I have not seen a penny from Phelps; you probably are wondering how my family and I are “okay” and I am able to do the things I have written about in my past blog posts?  The answer to that question revolves around my dad.  My dad is a world-renowned scientist who worked at the Orange County Sanitation District at the time of my accident — which is a government agency.  Upon my dad’s work hearing about our situation, they immediately took me under his wing to make sure I was going to be “okay,” by providing the greatest health insurance possible.

I have been in my wheelchair for 23 years now, and my family and I have had insurance that is beyond priceless.  My annual medical bills come to a total of $250,000, and his insurance pays 100 percent of them.  If my dad did not have a job at the time of my accident, our lives would be very different, that is why I would very loosely say, “we are okay.”  For instance, people who are in the same situation as me, but are not as fortunate, typically end up going to a government run hospital.

I attended one of these hospitals six months after my accident, and it is one of the saddest places you can ever go to.  The hospital I visited is called Rancho Los Amigos, located in Downey, California.  Rancho is a leading hospital for people with spinal cord injuries as that is what they specialize in.  For individuals who have suffered spinal cord injuries and cannot afford insurance coverage or their family cannot take care of them — then Rancho is literally their home.

In today’s market with healthcare being a hot topic, due to Obama trying to bring some form of universal healthcare to the United States, I cannot stress the importance of it enough.  People who are against universal healthcare, never think anything will ever happen to them, but that type of thinking is delusional because nobody knows what is going to happen tomorrow.  I, myself, never planned on being in a wheelchair, but that is what life has dealt me, and I have had to deal with the circumstances.  The fact that health insurance companies are “for-profit entities” is crazy.  To think that if you as an individual are “too much of a liability” and they can drop you or raise their rate, is insane.

When it comes to the simple definition of the word “insurance,” it states: “a practice or arrangement by which a company or government agency provides a guarantee of compensation for specified loss, damage, illness, or death in return for payment of a premium.”  Notice, in the definition, there is nothing about dropping you if one becomes too much of a liability.

The United States is the only developed country in the world, that does not have a universal healthcare system, and until just seven years ago insurance companies could exclude people with pre-existing conditions.  With the United States current healthcare system not being a “Medicare for All Single-Payer,” we come in last place among other developed nations.  In my opinion, Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) was a good start, but it did not go far enough.

If the Republicans get their way with repealing the ACA and provide insurance companies the ability to: exclude people with pre-existing conditions, or allow insurance companies to charge people with pre-existing conditions any amount they choose that have lifetime maximums.  My family and I probably are going to be in serious trouble.  Health insurance is a “Right,” not a privilege and it is time for the United States to join the grown-up table and do something about it.

In 2015, Michael Moore released a film Where To Invade Next, in how he documented the flaws within the United States and shows how other countries handle our shortcomings.   The following clip shows how the United States taxes work compared to France who provides universal healthcare along with a lot more benefits we call “privileges:”

The clip above does a good job showing the difference in our nation compared to France, but the one thing it does not mention is “why” certain people are against universal healthcare.  People, who are against any form of universal healthcare, always argue they do not want such a system because they do not want to “pay” for someone else’s medical bills.  What these individuals do not understand is that the United States healthcare system having “for-profit health insurance corporations,” is that they already do.

For instance, in 2010, my dad retired from his job at the Orange County Sanitation District.  Upon him retiring we got to keep his health insurance, but instead of his work paying for it, it now costs us $2,400 a month or $28,800 a year.  However, keep in mind that the $28,800 a year covers $250,000 of medical bills.  So even though we pay an astronomical amount for our health insurance, our insurance company is losing $221,200 a year.  Where do you think for-profit health insurance corporations make up the difference?  Answer: healthy individuals who pay for insurance, but who have no significant medical expenses.

What this ultimately means is we do not have a Medicare for All Single-Payer system, but in reality, everyone is paying for everyone’s healthcare in a roundabout way — to satisfy the shareholders of “for-profit health insurance corporations.”  Many individuals blame the ACA for their rising healthcare premiums, but in reality, it is not.  When the ACA was passed, for the first time, individuals with pre-existing conditions could not be denied coverage, causing insurance companies to “insure” these individuals who need it the most.

So because individuals are actually “using” their health insurance, corporations are determined to find ways to make a profit.  That being said, the only way to get health insurance premiums down, is to get rid of the profit motive.  My family and I are out of the ordinary, but like Michael Moore showed in the video above, for many individuals they pay far more and get far less in return.

***

So with everything I have written about so far (minus the issue of healthcare), there ultimately is one (1) underlining theme going on in our society.  What I am talking about is the system’s failure to “rehabilitate” hardened criminals.

John Eric Phelps has had an extensive criminal history, causing him to be in and out of prison for a good portion of his life.  What this obviously means is the prison system is not “rehabilitating criminals,” which it is supposed to do.  This is called the recidivism rate, and the United States has one of the highest in the world.

In 2005, a study by the National Institute of Justice tracked over 400,000 prisoners in 30 different states to see how many criminals ended up back behind bars.  Ultimately, their findings were staggering:

  • Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
  • Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
  • Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.

With these statistics showing the failure of our correctional system, the two (2) sets of data that stick out to me are: 1, within five years 76.6 percent of released prisoners were rearrested, and 2, drug offenders 76.9 percent were rearrested.  The reason these numbers stick out to me is that they fit John Eric Phelps’ situation to a T, in how his prison history covers a ten-year span, due to drug related offenses.  Ultimately, what this shows is for whatever reason the criminal was sentenced, to begin with, they just come out the other side, the same person or even worse.

In comparing the United States correctional department to others around the world, we have 5 percent of the world’s population, but 25 percent of the prison population.  These numbers along with our recidivism rate at 76.6 percent shows we are doing something wrong.  But will we change?  No.  Norway, the country with the lowest recidivism rate, (20 percent), shows they are doing something right.  Why and how?  The reason is instead of trying to “punish” their criminals, they actually “rehabilitate” them so they can go back into society and function as ordinary citizens.  If the United States’ correctional institutions functioned like Norway’s and Phelps had gotten the drug treatment he needed upon his first arrest, I think I probably would not be in the situation I am today.

Once again here is another clip from Michael Moore’s film Where To Invade Next on how Norway’s correctional system works:

So, with the success of Norway’s prison system, why is the United States not following in their footsteps?  The reason is that crime is big business.  If crime were non-existent it would cause a dramatic snowball effect in how: law enforcement would be out of a job, courts would be empty, and our prisons would be vacant.  This would be devastating for the government as they survive on creating laws that people break in order to generate revenue.  A perfect example of this occurring right now is seen in for-profit prisons.

The last couple of years we have seen an uptick in hearing about for-profit prisons as they have garnished new attention from politicians and news media alike.  What has caused these prisons to enter the mainstream is major corporations like McDonald’s, Whole Foods and Victoria’s Secret (just to name a few) use the inmates as cheap labor.

Because these prisons are “for-profit corporations” and are interested in making money, recently the advocacy group “In The Public Interest” looked across the country and found that 30 states had, “…prison bed guarantees…[from] 70 percent occupancy in a California prison to 100 percent occupancy requirements at some Arizona prisons.  Most of the contracts had language mandating that at least 90 percent of prison beds be filled.”

So, with quotas like these and for-profit prisons demanding occupancy to stay full, what happens if the prisons do not remain at capacity?  Well, “[i]n short, many states are effectively obligated to continue to incarcerate people regardless of crime rates and public safety needs, or otherwise hand over taxpayer dollars in order to satisfy private profit-making companies.”

This is one of the scariest assessments I have ever read, in that for-profit prisons are requiring a quota from the local and state government to please their shareholders — it essentially is a “Trickle Down Incarceration” program.  Who is going to be that unfortunate victim to make the quota complete is not known and shows why “rehabilitation” is frowned upon.  But the state and the for-profit prisons do not care — it is about the bottom line.

Fortunately, not all prisons in the United States are “for-profit entities,” but Donald Trump is advocating adopting more throughout the country.  If the United States recidivism rate is currently at 76.6 percent now, what will the future look like if the correctional department has a vested interest in your return?

***

Before ending this post there is one last thing I want to talk about, and that is my future plans.  If you have been following me for some time or read my blog post Back To School…?…?, then you know I want to go back to college and get a Ph.D. in political science, a J.D. or both.  However, I have never pulled the trigger in applying to such programs as they require me to take either the LSAT or GRE, which is impossible for someone in my situation.

Taking standardized tests are incredibly difficult for someone in my situation because I physically cannot manipulate the material and I have to take the exam with someone I have never met before.  It does not matter if I am given double, triple or even an infinite amount of time, my results are not equal to someone who can take the test on their own.  It is a lot like taking an average Joe from the street, putting them in a Major League Baseball game and expecting them to hit a home run on their first at bat.  It is just impossible.

That being said, even though I more than likely am going to get a terrible score, I have decided I am going to try and take the LSAT in September and apply to graduate school to get a J.D./Ph.D. in political science.  If you have read the blog post above, then you know four colleges offer such a program; Stanford University being the only one on the west coast.  With Stanford being the only college on the west coast that offers such a program, I have decided I am going to give it a shot and apply.  Why?

I have decided to apply because I have reached a point in my life where what is it going to hurt?  I am tired of just sitting around reading books and doing nothing with my life.  If I knew what my future held, I would have just stayed in college and collected Major after Major.  All Stanford can do is say, “No” and if that is the case, then so be it and I will go back to doing what I am doing now…nothing.

Okay, now by no means do I actually expect to get into Stanford’s J.D./Ph.D. program, but if by some “Divine miracle” I actually do, there are four (4) things I want to do post graduation:

1) Finish My Book:  If you have been following me for some time or read a couple of my very early blog posts, then you know four years ago I set out to write a book on my life.  Back then I should have written a post titled, “Book = Dead,” but I never got around to it.

After writing a couple of chapters, I started looking into finding an editor/ghostwriter to help clean up the story and figure out the organization of the chapters.  Upon doing so, I soon learned that books followed the same three act structure films do, which was not good for me.  After contacting the editors/ghostwriters, everyone I talked to said, “Unfortunately, you do not have a 3rd act.  There needs to be some form of resolution post accident, in how I either made it in Hollywood or got California vehicle code 17004.7 revoked.”

Initially, when I mapped out my book, I thought my ending could be: “Why Am I Still Here?”  I thought this would be an appropriate ending as I should have died six times and the only reason I am still here is sheer luck and fortunate timing with doctors, nurses and my parents being at the right place at the right time.  Unfortunately, all the editors/ghostwriters I talked to said, “That was not a good enough ending or resolution to cause the book to come full circle.  The ‘Why Am I Still Here?’ scenario is like a drop off at the end of a cliff.”

Hearing this caused me to be disappointed in how I needed to put the book on hold because I thought it might be my calling card in Hollywood — which leads me to where I am today.  It has taken me several years to figure it out, but my third act in my life is how I no longer want to try and make it in the film industry.  Instead, it is how I want to attend Stanford’s J.D./Ph.D. in political science program.  It shows how my life has come full circle from wanting to make it in Hollywood, to going back to college to complete the agenda below.  I already have a title in mind, “Life Is Something…”

2) Work For The ACLU: The ACLU defines themselves as the “Guardians of Freedom” with a motto of, “To defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.”

Post graduation I would like to work for them as I have been a loyal ACLU supporter since 2014.  What caused me to become an ACLU member is I saw how they were defending Edward Snowden for being the political hero he is, for exposing our government’s corruption.  After watching the ACLU defend Snowden, I soon saw what they were really about.  For instance, the stereotype surrounding their organization is that they are a “Liberal group” trying to hold down Conservative ideas, but that is not true.

The ACLU has sued every political party that either tries to or has taken away citizens rights.  Just to give a quick example, the past eight years the ACLU has been criticizing/suing the Obama administration over their use of drones in foreign countries, and they now are doing the same thing with the Trump administration’s desire to monitor and not allow people of the Muslim religion to enter our country.   Ultimately, the ACLU believes in the Constitution and are there to make sure nobody’s civil rights are violated regardless of who you are.  You can see their letter to Trump post-election here: “Dear President-elect Trump.”

Other than that, one of the main aspects that continues my support of being an ACLU member is their recent push back against law enforcement.  For the past several years we have seen countless videos of cops shooting innocent people, violating these individuals’ Constitutional rights without any forms of repercussion.  When I was 7 years old my Fourth Amendment was violated by law enforcement, there were no repercussions, and I do not want it to happen again to me or anyone else.  After my accident when my family sued the Laguna Beach Police Department, it very much was a David vs. Goliath situation.  Goliath ended up winning that battle, but we never know what the future brings.

Even though, I am an ACLU member, by no means do I agree with 100 percent of what they stand for.  The one thing the ACLU and I strongly disagree on is the Citizens United Supreme Court case.  In 2010 the supreme court opened the floodgates to massive corruption in granting corporations and individuals the ability to donate an unlimited amount of political contributions to any candidate running for office.  The ACLU sees this as a First Amendment issue, but to many people (including me), it seems more like “legal bribery.”  For that reason, many people (including me), would like to see a 28th Amendment added to the Constitution prohibiting such acts, which the ACLU is, unfortunately, strongly against.

3) Work For The Democratic National Committee (DNC).  I currently do not like the way the DNC is being run, and I highly doubt they will exclusively listen to me — but I at least want to try.  During the political election cycle of last year, I was a Bernie Sanders supporter, and I hated how the chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz along with the rest of the DNC set out to try and sabotage Bernie’s campaign.  For this reason, the DNC is the reason Donald Trump is the president of the United States.  Hillary Clinton was not an electable candidate, she had the second highest disapproval rating ever for a presidential nominee.  The first being Donald Trump.

The current thinking of the DNC is, “We decide who the Democratic Presidential candidate is going to be, and the public just has to deal with.”  That is not a winning strategy and not how things are supposed to work, it is not WHO THE COMMITTEE WANTS — it is WHO THE VOTERS WANT!!!  Debbie Wasserman Schultz ended up resigning due to the Bernie Sanders fiasco and was replaced by Tom Perez, but I still do not like the way things are going.

If I get the opportunity to work for the DNC, I would like to bring a more Progressive platform to the party.  Many people are tired of the “establishment candidate,” and that is why Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders did so well without the respective backing from their own political party.  My current favorite progressive politician is Elizabeth Warren.

During the 2016 primary season, Warren was faced with incredible pressure to endorse Hillary Clinton, due to her popularity with Democratic voters — despite having conflicting views.  Warren ended up doing so at the Democratic National Convention, but I wish she would have stuck to her beliefs and endorsed Bernie Sanders early in the primary season rather than being succumbed to the DNC pressure because a Sanders/Warren ticket would have beaten Donald Trump.

I Attended A Bernie Sanders Rally At The Anaheim Convention Center During The 2016 Primaries.

4) Become A Professor: The final and last thing I would like to do after completing everything above, (or not), would be to become a professor at the University of Hawaii.  Knowledge is a powerful tool, and I would like to educate the youth like I have educated myself on the issues facing our country today.  It may sound cliche, but the kids of today are our future, and I would like to share my unique life perspective.

If you are wondering why I picked the University of Hawaii?  I would like to be a professor there because quadriplegics like myself are always cold, due to not being able to regulate our body temperature.  My ideal weather would be 85 degrees 24/7/365 and from what I understand Hawaii comes pretty close to that.  I know if I get into Stanford, I will be moving to a colder environment, but I am willing to sacrifice a little discomfort to go back to college.

***

My list has a lot of accomplishments and dreams that are hard to do, but without dreams, life would be boring, and nobody would accomplish anything.  I, myself, have accomplished quite a bit in my lifetime despite the significant obstacles placed in front of me, but obstacles are obstacles, and they are meant to be overtaken.  I think Ellie Arroway from the film Contact said it best:

You wanna hear something really nutty?  I heard of a couple guys who wanna build something called an airplane, you know you get people to go in, and fly around like birds, it’s ridiculous, right?  And what about breaking the sound barrier, or rockets to the moon, or atomic energy, or a mission to Mars?  Science fiction, right?  Look, all I’m asking, is for you to just have the tiniest bit of vision.  You know, to just sit back for one minute and look at the big picture.  To take a chance on something that just might end up being the most profoundly impactful moment for humanity, for the history… of history. 

***UPDATED 7/18/2017***

It has just come to my attention that, ironically, on July 11, 2017, the Los Angeles County, Grand Jury released a scathing response to the unnecessary police pursuits occurring throughout the city; in how they are causing injuries and deaths to innocent bystanders.  I, myself, do not live in the Los Angeles County area, but at least the word is getting out about the devastation and corruption around police pursuits, which is exactly what I have been trying to do for the past four (4) years.  The following are two (2) links to the report:

Los Angeles Times — Police Pursuits Cause Unnecessary Deaths And Injuries, L.A. County Grand Jury Says

Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury — Final Report

22 Years And Counting…

***DISCLAIMER I WROTE THIS BLOG POST A WEEK AGO, THEREFORE EVERYTHING I SAID WAS WRITTEN BEFORE THE EVENTS OF LAST WEEK.  IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE MY OPINION ON THE EVENTS THAT OCCURRED THEY ARE BELOW***

It is hard to believe, but another year has already gone by.  When I was a kid a year felt like an eternity, but the older I get the years seem to go by faster and faster.  If you have been following me for some time then you know I typically write a blog post reflecting on my accident in how I am extremely lucky to even be alive.  Since, I started writing this blog, these past several years on this day, I wrote about the injustice of our judicial system in terms of the extreme corruption within police departments when it comes to police pursuits or use of excessive force by those individuals who are “supposed” to “protect & serve” us residence.

That being said, I told myself last year’s post 21 Years And Counting… would be the last time I was going to write on such issues within the police and judicial system as it looked like nothing was going to change.  However, due to cameras virtually being everywhere nowadays, every year that goes by it seems people are wising up to what police and their departments have been getting away with since the dawn of mankind.  With all this new visual information getting released almost on a daily basis, “change” maybe in the works causing people to realize that the evidence points the finger in “my direction” for what I have been saying these past several years.

Ironically, just twenty-two days after I published last years post 21 Years And Counting…, a lot of new evidence was exposed by a USAToday article on the undercounted numbers of people injured or killed due to police pursuits.  The USAToday, article was released July 31, 2015, and it elaborated on the inconsistencies of the recordings of how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) tallies the number of individuals that are killed annually due to police pursuits.  And its conclusion mainly has to due with where the source of information is coming from.

The NHTSA’s slogan is “Save lives, prevent injuries, reduce vehicle-related crashes.”  However, when it comes to understanding the number of individuals killed due to police pursuits, their numbers may not be showing the whole picture.  There are multiple problems when it comes to the NHTSA’s numbers, and I talked briefly about this back in 2013, in my post 19 Years And Counting.  One of the main reasons the NHTSA’s numbers are incredibly inaccurate is the information given is directly from police departments.  Not an independent organization.  As a result of this, the information is very misleading.  In fact, a 2002, FBI bulletin (starts on page 15) stated the reason why:

The interpretation of the term “pursuit-related crash” represents one common police practice that affects accuracy of reporting.  Often, police officers or their agencies will make the determination that a crash occurred right after a pursuit was “terminated,” hence the crash is not pursuit-related.  Agencies immediately can determine if this occurred by replaying tapes of radio transmissions during the pursuit, even days after completing a comprehensive accident investigation or reconstruction.  Either way, the process can be very subjective.

With the data being presented to the NHTSA this way, the figures USAToday found were that:

At least 11,506 people, including 6,300 fleeing suspects, were killed in police chases from 1979 through 2013, most recent year for which NHTSA records are available. That’s an average of 329 a year — nearly one person a day.

But those figures likely understate the actual death toll because NHTSA uses police reports to determine if a crash was chase-related, and some reports do not disclose that a chase occurred.

With facts being solely collected by the NHTSA from police reports that may not be showing the “whole picture” USAToday found that the number of deaths could be exceedingly higher:

NHTSA’s undercount suggests that the actual number of people killed in police chases since 1979 could be more than 15,000 — far more than the 11,506 chase-related deaths found in the agency’s public records — and that chases result in a death much more frequently than studies have stated.

Since, the data of police chases do not count those injured or killed after a pursuit is supposedly, “terminated,” we really have no idea what the actual numbers are.  The irony of the way the statistics are collected means my accident on July 11, 1994, did not make it into that year’s data as the Laguna Beach police chief “claimed” the officer “stopped the chase” about an eighth of a mile ahead of the guy fleeing.  So this just goes to show the hypocrisy in the research, as I suffered a catastrophic injury as a result of the police pursuit the cop initiated.

With injuries and deaths not counted after a pursuit is “supposedly terminated” USAToday, found:

The number of innocent bystanders killed is impossible to pinpoint because hundreds of NHTSA’s records fail to show whether a victim was killed in a car fleeing police or in a car that happened to be hit during a chase.

Analyzing each fatal crash, USA TODAY determined that at least 2,456 bystanders were killed, although the death toll could be as high as 2,750.

Injuries are even harder to count because NHTSA keeps records of only fatal crashes.

However, records from six states show that 17,600 people were hurt in chases from 2004 through 2013 — an average of 1,760 injuries a year in those states, which make up 24% of the U.S. population.
  Those numbers suggest that chases nationwide may have injured 7,400 people a year — more than 270,000 people since 1979.

So, with all these statistics pointing out the flawed numbers of individuals, killed or injured due to police pursuits, you would think police departments and the public would want to do something in order to prevent this from further happening.  But that could not be farther from the truth.

There are typically, two types of people in this world when it comes to dealing with the police: 1) those who love them or 2) those who hate them.  The difference between these two types of individuals are those who love cops, see them as protecting their town so they can live their way of life, therefore, they support everything they do and criticize anything that draws negativity.  Where those who hate cops are individuals, who see them as power hungry people who think of themselves above the law, whose sole job is to harass and tax the residents of the town so the city can stay afloat.

For instance, look at the comment section from the USAToday article, in how there are a lot of “pro-police” individuals calling the article “anti-police” and “yellow journalism” for just trying to show awareness of the inconstancy in the statistics.  In terms of where I find myself standing on the “pro” or “anti” police spectrum, I definitely fall into the second category, but I was not always on that side.

Growing up post my accident I never really looked into my situation as I was a kid, where I only though about, “How can I have the most fun today?”  However, what caused me to start hating cops was four years ago I began looking into police pursuits, and I learned how common innocent victims like myself were getting seriously injured or killed, but cops and their departments showed little to no empathy.  Therefore, I figured if cops do not have any respect for me, why should I have respect for them?  I started to figure this out after reading tons of articles and bulletins on this matter where cops, police chiefs and their departments always say, it is kind of sad someone died or was injured, but it was not our fault.  Although, the FBI disagrees.

Let me take my accident, for instance, the cop who initiated the police pursuit was off duty, out of his own jurisdiction and on his way to get his radio fixed.  However, the police chief defended the officer’s actions and the city of Laguna Beach “lawyered” up because they knew they were going to get sued.  I was only seven years old at the time, and the police should have been trying to help me, not screw me over.

The USAToday, article mentioned how and why police pursue individuals at all costs, instead of thinking about all the lives they are endangering:

Police often suspect fleeing drivers are wanted for a serious offense.  And they dislike letting a violator get away.  During a chase police can be overcome by “a need to ‘win’ and make the arrest,” which blinds them to the danger they are helping create, a 2010 FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin reported.

Also, with the polices’ desire to “win” in the fact that they will chase someone indefinitely endangering thousand upon thousands of innocent people, USAToday, found a Justice Department study stating police are significantly under trained:

The average police trainee received 72 hours of weapons training compared to 40 hours of driving training, only a portion of which covered chases, according to a 2006 Justice Department study of police training academies.

It is crazy to think that those who are there to supposedly “protect & serve” us residents receive less than 2-days of driver training, and just 3-days of gun training before being sent out into the real world.  That is significantly one of the problems in how it only takes six months of training and a minimum education level of a GED (General Education Development) to “enforce” the law, but seven years of education to “defend” the law.  So, we have individuals who are uneducated with minimal training patrolling our streets.  If we raised the standards of education and increased the training, I think it will fix a lot of our problems.

***

Overall, the police are not the only individuals who are to blame or criticize in how they handle these situations; it also has to do with the local news.  A couple of months ago I was on our local news affiliate NBC4 Los Angeles’ website.  As I was browsing around, I stumbled upon a thumbnail at the bottom of the front page, with a picture from a helicopter showing a moving truck on the freeway, with the caption, “Car Chases.”  I clicked the link, and it brought me to a page loaded with videos showing all the police pursuits you can imagine.  The really disturbing part was the head of the page had the following image:

NBC 4 Southern California Pursuits

Los Angeles is the police pursuit capital of the world, and this is the exact problem with our news media in that it is supposed to be “informative,” but instead they treat a very serious issue as if it is “entertainment” as police pursuits are ratings boosters.  Will Ferrell portrayed this in a great scene from Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues:

This scene which is just a little over 3 minutes in length sums up a lot about our society in what we deem “important information” or “entertainment.”  It also captures the way our local news salivates over police pursuits.  The lines that hit the nail on the head are: RON BURGUNDY: “A high-speed car chase is in progress, reaching speeds of 100 mph, and for the first time in news history, we will stay with it live until it resolves in either a huge accident or a massive shootout.”  LINDA JACKSON: “Freddie, what is going on, why is there a local car chase on TV?  FREDDIE SAPP: “It’s Burgundy, he insisted on it.”  LINDA JACKSON: “Can’t you see what that son of a bitch is doing?  We didn’t have a story so he made one.”  FREDDIE SAPP: “You can’t do that!”  LINDA JACKSON: “Tell Ron to speculate on who is driving the car.”

***

Before I end this blog post, there is one last thing I wanted to talk about.  On April 12th of this year, something happened to me that was associated around my accident, and it was incredibly creepy.  My parents and I attended a city council meeting to support an item up for discussion.  After sitting in the audience and watching the meeting progress, we ended up having to leave early, due to the issue we were there to support was not going to be discussed before I needed to get out of my chair.  At first, I was a little disappointed that I was not going to be in the room to be apart of the discussion, but without knowing at the time, it was a good thing that we left.

During every city council meeting, there is a section of the meeting called “public comments,” where anyone can get up and talk about an issue they might be having within the city.  When I got home, I started streaming the meeting on my TV through the city’s online link.  During the public comments, a stack of cards are given to the Mayor of those individuals who want to speak.  As the Mayor went through card after card calling each individual up to talk, my jaw hit the floor when I heard one of the last names called.  I am not going to use the individual’s name, so I do not get sued for defamation, but the individual who was there to say their two cents was one of the lawyers that represented the city of Laguna Beach in our lawsuit against them.

Reading that last sentence some of you may not think that is a big deal.  But what creeped me out about being in the same room with the lawyer, was four years ago when I started doing research on my accident I found both of the individuals who represented the city of Laguna Beach online.  The one who was at the meeting has our case on his resume, and he is proud that he screwed over my family and I.

For the next several days it really bothered me that I was in the same room with someone who is proud that they screwed over a 7-year-old kid.  The only way I can really think of a way to convey what it felt like to be in the same room with that individual, is what I imagine it must be like what a rape victim goes through when they have to attend a courtroom and identify the suspect.  If I did not have to leave early and would have been in the room when the Mayor called the individual’s name, I have no idea how I would have reacted.

With everything I have written over these years from my previous posts 19 Years And Counting…, 20 Years And Counting…, 21 Years And Counting… and now 22 Years And Counting…, I have learned a tremendous amount on police corruption, and police pursuits that hurt innocent people almost on a daily basis.  However, police departments are constantly tweaking their pursuit policies to try and make their liability window smaller and smaller.  This is one of the reasons I want to attend law school, as I want to try and help those with little power who’s civil rights were violated like mine.

Ultimately, because of this, pursuit policies are just written forms of literature that are developed by huge law firms that put any form of rhetoric they can think of to cover themselves from liability.  Just look at my case, in how the cop who initiated the pursuit that left me a (C1, C2) quadriplegic: was off duty, out of his own jurisdiction, and on his way to get his radio fixed essentially rendering him “deaf” and “blind.”  But despite those things being grossly negligent, they were all covered in Laguna Beach’s pursuit policy, complying with the minimum standards of California Vehicle Code 17004.7 giving them 100 percent immunity.

Whether anything will ever “change” in the near future is still waiting to be seen.  However, it sure looks like police departments and the public, in general, are not itching to do anything different to prevent future deaths or injuries.  In fact, the USAToday article found that: 

Officers continue to violate pursuit policies concerning when to avoid or stop a chase, police records show.  And federally funded high-tech systems that would obviate chases, such as vehicle tracking devices, are undeveloped or rarely used due to cost.

People every day go about their daily lives oblivious to the dangers around them.  It takes something drastic to happen before their minds are opened.  Just look at the debate on global warming, in how 97 percent of scientist agree it is happening and it is man made, but still a significant portion of the United States population does not believe it is occurring.  The reason for this is we do not see the every day affects due to not living on the polar ice caps.  So when it starts affecting a significantly greater number of people in their own homes, it will be too late.

If you have not already, I highly recommend reading the USAToday article in its entirety, as I did not cover everything.  There also is an interesting data analyst chart where you can checkout the number of individuals killed in police pursuits by typing in your state.

***RESPONSE TO EVENTS OF LAST WEEK***

I was going to stop this post at the previous paragraph, but with the deadly shootings last week of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile and the five officers killed in Dallas on Thursday; I felt compelled to say something, because I talked about a lot of these issues.

Cops are the individuals in our community that are supposed to be there if we run into trouble.  However, there is a disproportionate way police officers view each individual, specifically when it comes to race.  It would be nice if police were colorblind, but unfortunately, we do not live in that world.  As a result of this whether you want to hear it or not the black community has significantly been picked on by cops, without fear of any repercussions.

Since, the invention of the “smart phone” putting a camera in virtually everyone’s pocket, people have been able to record any activity that they deem “important” with extraordinary ease.  Just 10 to 20 years ago this was not possible, but because of the advancements in technology people have been able to capture “news related stores” in real time, significantly, broadening our horizon to what is happening within our community.  Ultimately, this new technology has mainly shined light on what our police departments have been getting away with forever.

With the emergence of cell phone video, people have begun recording police activity as they see it happening in their daily lives, trying to keep police accountable for their actions.  Police officers do not necessarily like it, but the ability to record officers in public is protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution.  In fact, the ACLU created an app called, Mobile Justice which allows you to record audio/video where it can be sent to your local ACLU branch with the touch of a button if your phone gets confiscated and searched, (which is illegal unless a warrant is sought — see the 2014, Supreme Court Case: Riley v. California.)

Other than that, this might come to a surprise to you, but there is no federal agency that keeps track of the number of individuals killed a year by the police and their departments.  The reason for this is police departments do not want one.  Since there is no national database documenting the number of individuals killed by police, other sources like newspapers began trying to do so.

One of the most respected databases that keeps track of individuals killed by police in the United States is The Guardian’s, The Counted.  The Counted found the total number of people killed in 2015, came in at 1146, where 2016, has already reached 571 (as of this posting) and the year is barely half over.  Even James Comey, the head of the FBI said, “…it is ’embarrassing and ridiculous’ that the federal government has no better information on police shootings than databases compiled by the Guardian US and the Washington Post.”

With these numbers showing the data, we can guarantee that 100 percent of those killed were not all guilty, but trying to identify the percentage of those killed who were not guilty is a difficult thing to pin-point.  However, cell phone video is helping tremendously.  Looking at the statistics the highest percentage of individuals killed by police in 2015, were members of the black community with the probability of 7.27 killed per 1 million individuals.

As a result of this and video capturing police killings of unarmed individuals in the black community, an organization began to be seen throughout social media called, “Black Lives Matter” (BLM).  If you are a Fox News watcher, you would not know it, but BLM is a peaceful movement in how they support non-violent protests to help further their cause of the awareness of police corruption in terms of excessive force.  Black Lives Matter has always been a non-violent movement as they look at themselves to be better than police departments that kill and defend their actions to the Nth degree.

The shooting last week (by the individual I will not identify as that is what he wants) in how he killed five officers and shot 12, was unfortunately, going to happen sooner or later.  The reason it was only a matter of time before an “unstable person” retaliated against the police, is how they have been responding to criticism over these past years.

Cops, police chiefs, their departments and especially, the police unions think whatever they do is always “justified,” regardless of how silly or negligent the actions may be.  A great example, is how Tamir Rice a 12-year-old kid, was shot and killed by two officers within 2 seconds of arriving on the scene for having a toy gun.  The police union leader in Cleveland defended the actions of the officers saying they were completely justified and was upset players on the Cleveland Browns football team had “Justice for Tamir Rice” on their jerseys.  Cenk Uygur from The Young Turks does a great job breaking down the video and the union leader’s statements below:

It is statements like these where someone who represents the police, has zero sympathy for killing not an adult, not a teenager, but a kid, is why people in the black community do not respect cops and are hesitant to deal with the police in their community.  In fact, what makes the Tamir Rice case even more ridiculous, is Ohio has “open carry” laws permitting individuals to carry guns “openly” in public.

The events of Thursday, really were unfortunate, as retaliation is never the answer and it changed the talking points from showing the corruption of the police after the killings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile, to cause people to rally around cops diminishing what BLM is trying to shed light on.  In fact, because of this lone gunman (who was not associated with BLM), it more than likely will cause more innocent people to be killed because it just puts everyone on edge.

As the years have gone by and police stories have dominated the news of unarmed individuals constantly being killed by police in the United States, with little to no consequences The Young Turks did a phenomenal story in what sets “our police” apart from the rest of the “world’s police.”  You can see it here:

Overall, there are significant problems with our police force in the United States as it disproportionately affects individuals all across different race, ethnic and economic backgrounds.  If our country is going to get any better in the near future, we must find a way to bridge the gaps, and Donald Trump is not helping by playing into people’s fears/emotions.  The police are the individuals who created these issues, therefore, it is their turn to step up to the plate.

For sometime now, I have been watching this YouTube channel called LiberalViewer and the following video sums up what is going on within our society.  It is by far one of the best videos I have ever watched in my lifetime:

21 Years And Counting…

Well, another year has gone by, and I am still here.  However, over these past 365 days, many were not so lucky as hundreds have died and thousands upon thousands have been injured, due to being innocent victims of police pursuits.  Since I started this blog a little over three years ago this will mark the third time I have written a post recalling the anniversary of my accident that left me a (C1, C2) quadriplegic (For more information see Frustrated, But Not Discouraged! and 19 Years And Counting…).

Over these past years, I started paying attention to “police misconduct” and the justice system in relation to those whose civil rights were violated like mine.  What I have learned is depressing, frustrating and down right wrong, but the U.S. system is so corrupt that nothing will change unless you are a billionaire that can “bribe” politicians.

In terms of “police misconduct” what I have noticed over the years due to the “police state” nature of the United States is yesterday, today and tomorrow, someone’s civil rights were and will be violated by a “law enforcement citizen.”  But the police department and their lawyers will do more to protect the “law enforcement citizen” than the citizens of the community they are there to “protect & serve.”

That being said, since nothing is going to be done about the “police state” nature of the United States, this will be my last post writing on “police misconduct.”  However, since this is going to be my last post there are a couple of final things I want to talk about showing the absurdity of “police immunity.”

If you have been following me or read my other blog posts mentioned above, then you know one person a day is killed due to police pursuits, and 30 percent of them are innocent victims.  Right now like California throughout the country, innocent victims have nowhere to go for financial recourse if something happens YOU!  The law granting police immunity in California is CVC 17004.7.

Ultimately, this law protects the city and their police department from lawsuits regardless of what happens to you or me during a police pursuit, giving the criminal more rights.  As a result of this, every year there are lawsuits filed by innocent victims, but every time we are the losers making us suffer the consequences for mining our own business and being “law abiding citizens.”

In terms of police pursuits and their innocent victims in 2002, the Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, heard a case after a third party individual died as result of a police pursuit.  In this hearing, the court issued their ruling in favor of the police department, but like my case, they did so with “reluctance.”  However, this time the court wrote a scathing response in how they were not happy with the language used in CVC 17004.7.

The case heard that sent the appeals court on a tirade was Nguyen v. City Of Westminster.  To give you a little background on this case we have to go back to October of 1995.  On October 12, 1995, a van that had been reported stolen was spotted by “law enforcement citizen” Ingwerson of the Westminster Police Department; the driver of the stolen van William David Seehusen who was 18 years old did not stop so Ingwerson pursued the vehicle.  The police pursuit went through many cities where it ultimately came to an end on the campus of La Quinta High School, in Garden Grove; at the time seriously injuring an innocent victim Khuong Van Nguyen.

This may sound like just another police pursuit, but the absurdity of this one is Ingwerson chased the individual fleeing, on the La Quinta High School CAMPUS and FOOTBALL FIELD when students were getting out of school, IN THEIR CARS.  Ultimately, this shows the exact thinking and mindset of “law enforcement citizens,” in how they will chase someone literally ANYWHERE and endanger ANYONE whether the reasoning large or small for their own personal enjoyment in order to get the adrenaline rush rather than for the safety of the public.  Khuong Van Nguyen ended up dying three years later as a result of his injuries.  The court’s response on the case is as follows:

In so deciding this case, we wish to express our displeasure with the current version of section 17004.7. As noted, one reason for extending immunity to a public entity that adopts a written policy on vehicle pursuits is to advance the goal of public safety.  But the law in its current state simply grants a ‘get out of liability free card’ to public entities that go through the formality of adopting such a policy.  There is no requirement the public entity implement the policy through training or other means.  Simply adopting the policy is sufficient under the current state of the law.   

Unfortunately, the adoption of a policy which may never be implemented is cold comfort to innocent bystanders who get in the way of a police pursuit.  We do not know if the policy was followed in this instance, and that is precisely the point: We will never know because defendant did not have to prove Ingwerson or the other police officers participating in this pursuit followed the policy.  It is especially chilling that this particular instance occurred on the property of a school where students were present, but it is also sad that one blameless person was seriously injured as a result of the pursuit, and that his family has no option for redress.

We urge the Legislature to revisit this statute and seriously reconsider the balance between public entity immunity and public safety.  The balance appears to have shifted too far toward immunity and left public safety, as well as compensation for innocent victims, twisting in the wind.

When it comes to police pursuits, people always assume chasing and capturing criminals equals lower crime rates, but that is not the case.  The FBI releases a report every 10 years on the statistics of police pursuits and the report in 2010, shined light on two things: 1, criminals slow down after a chase is terminated and 2, crime does not go up after terminating a chase.  The following quote is from the 2010 report:

One of the more interesting findings from the suspects concerned [criminals] willingness to slow down when the police stopped chasing them. Approximately 75 percent reported that they would slow down when they felt safe. They explained that on average, they would have ‘to be free from the police show of authority by emergency lights or siren for approximately two blocks in town…and 2.5 miles on a freeway.’11 In other words, suspects who have fled from the police report that once the officer terminates the pursuit, they will slow down within a reasonable period.  In addition, research has shown that if the police refrain from chasing all offenders or terminate their pursuits, no significant increase in the number of suspects who flee would occur.8

These findings were significant as cops in the past always argued, the criminals fleeing were the individuals who dictated the speed, and that crime would increase.  However, in reality, crime does not go up and cops ARE the ones who control the speed.  A simple analogy is the same thing as a dog chasing a cat.  The faster the dog runs, the faster the cat will go.

Looking back earlier in this post recall what I mentioned above in how CVC 17004.7, gives criminals more rights than “law abiding citizens.”  This is exactly true and a perfect example showing this occurred in December of 2013.  On December 13, 2013, Brian Beaird led the LAPD on a wild police chase for over an hour.  The police pursuit came to a conclusion when Beaird broadsided a Nissan, where he then proceeded to run on foot.  As Beaird began running, his back was turned to the police along with his arms in the air.  At this point, 3 LAPD officers opened fire shooting Beaird 15 to 20 times killing him.

I dove into greater detail on this incident in my blog post Justice Is Not Fair! from last year, and I should have created a Justice Is Not Fair! Part: Two as a follow-up, but I never got to it. Following the police pursuit that left Beard (the criminal fleeing) dead his family filed a $20 million civil rights lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles as the LAPD violated his Fourth Amendment Right.  Ultimately, the trial never happened as the city settled the lawsuit out of court giving the Beard family $5 million.

The first time I heard the details of the settlement I was completely dumbfounded and in shock for a couple of days that someone who ran from the police for over an hour, had more rights than the “law abiding citizens” Beard and the LAPD endangered.  However, that is the way the laws are currently written, and I doubt anything will change in the future.

On top of the settlement with the Beard family, what really added insult to an open wound for innocent victims that were either killed or injured due to police pursuits, was that LAPD Chief Charlie Beck apologized to the Beard family over their son’s death.  Chief Charlie Beck said, “This was a terrible tragedy and I want to express my heartfelt sorrow to the Beaird family. I am truly sorry for their loss.”

This is extremely frustrating to me and any individual who has become an innocent victim of a police pursuit because the police always DEFEND their actions when third party individuals get hurt or killed.  It happened in my case and again last year when Vivian Nguyen (no relation to the case above) a 12-year-old girl was killed due to being an innocent victim.  You can find both of the statements here: Trent McGeeVivian Nguyen

Police pursuits happen every day, but more in California as we are the pursuit capital of the world.  In 2012, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) released statistics saying,  “More bystanders are injured or killed during high-speed police chases than by stray bullets.  In California, more than 10,000 people have been injured and over 300 people killed because of police chases in the last decade…” and nothing is going change causing innocent victims to suffer the financial hardship on their own thanks to CVC 17004.7.

The only way police pursuits and CVC 17004.7 will come to a striking halt, is if someone like Jimmy Kimmel, Ellen Degeneres or a politician’s child or family member gets killed or seriously injured.  So until that happens, every year more and more people will become innocent victims, and they will have to face the financial hardship on their own, which is sad, depressing and wrong.

Rhetoric Is A Powerful Weapon!!!

On January 2nd a news article by Wonkette.com began circulating on social-media that exposed/questioned the language used by the media when it came to police misconduct.  The article shined light on an incident that occurred in New York on December 23, 2014, where an ”individual” later to be identified as a member of the NYPD, physically assaulted a Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) employee.

The initial story broke on December 31st on NYDailynews.com with the title “Thug attacks female MTA employee at Bronx train station: cops (VIDEO)” were the NYPD asked for the public’s help to find the culprit.  The article continued on to write a lede that said, “A hulking brute grabbed a 28-year-old MTA employee up in a bear hug at a Bronx train station, shoved her onto the platform and began choking her in an unprovoked attack – then ran away smiling…”.  The rhetoric used in this sentence portrays a pretty graphic picture of what the individual looks like and what happened.  However, the following day after the individual turned himself in and happened to be a “cop,” the language was cleaned up.

Following the cop turning himself in NYDailynews.com re-published the article containing a new title and lede.  The new title read, “NYPD cop turns himself in for attacking female MTA employee,” where the lede was changed to “Police Officer Mirjan Lolja, 37, was suspended after the assault in which the Metropolitan Transportation Authority worker — who was on-duty and in her uniform — was allegedly put into a bear hug, thrown to the floor and choked, cops said.”  The difference between the two written pieces are quite drastic in not only the words used, but also the tone and sentence structure.

For instance, when it comes to the difference between these two articles, the title has removed the word “thug” and in the re-written lede, the words “hulking brute” are taken out along with the sentence focusing more on the MTA employee.  The other interesting language added to the lede was the use of the word “allegedly.”  The first article presumed the individual was already guilty, but after finding out the culprit was a “cop” the article had to use “legal terms” instead of the more derogatory remarks.  This type of rhetoric just goes to show that when the media is dealing with a story that revolves around a “cop,” there is a double standard that is different than dealing with a “normal individual” of society.

After Wonkette.com published their article pointing out the noticeable differences, other websites began picking up the story; one of them being AddictingInfo.orgAddictingInfo.org pointed out the same differences Wonkette.com did.  However, they elaborated on an additional incident that occurred with the NYPD on November 21st of last year.

The incident on November 21st dealt with a boyfriend and girlfriend who were waiting for an elevator in a Brooklyn, New York apartment complex.  After waiting for the elevator for some time, the two entered the stairway where the boyfriend was accidentally shot and killed by police who were on the stairway floor above them.

Following the shooting, the NYTimes.com published an article about the incident.  The part of the article that is interesting is how the author described the shooting.  “Two police officers prepared to enter the pitch-black eighth-floor stairwell of a building in a Brooklyn housing project, one of them with his sidearm drawn.  At the same time, a man and his girlfriend, frustrated by a long wait for an elevator, entered the seventh-floor stairwell, 14 steps below.  In the darkness, a shot rang out from the officer’s gun, and the 28-year-old man below was struck in the chest and, soon after, fell dead.”

In the previous sentence, the author chooses words like “frustrated” to describe the individuals entering the stairway, which attracts a negative connotation and completely lacks to say anything about the cop shooting the boyfriend.  In fact, in a sense, the author almost treats the gun as an individual itself in how the article reads, “In the darkness, a shot rang out from the officer’s gun…” it is as if the gun fired on its own.

After reading the articles written by Wonkette.com and AddictingInfo.org, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Los Angeles Times used their rhetoric to describe the cop’s actions who initiated the police pursuit that left me the way I am today.  After checking out the articles written about my family and I, the one that struck my attention the most dealt with talking about the lawsuit we filed against the city of Laguna Beach’s police department.

Some of you know we lost our lawsuit with the police department, due to California vehicle code 17004.7, (For more information, please read my blog posts 19 Years And Counting…, 21 Years And Counting… and 22 Years And Counting…).  Anyway, the article printed in the Los Angeles Times stated, “In their lawsuit, the McGees alleged that [name withheld], never should have started the chase and was ‘an imminent hazard . . . to innocent citizens’ because he was on a motorcycle with a broken police radio.  Although off duty and on the way to Santa Ana to have the radio fixed, [name withheld] was in uniform at the time.”

The part that I found interesting was how the newspaper wrote, “Although off duty and on the way to Santa Ana to have the radio fixed, [name withheld] was in uniform at the time.”  To me, this rhetoric used emphasizes although the officer made three critical mistakes in how he was off-duty, out of his own jurisdiction and on his way to get his radio fixed, it gives credit to the officer by implying what he did was “okay” just because he was “in uniform.”

Overall, what these few examples mean is when it comes to newspaper articles written about cops or anyone in general, you must remember that regardless whether the rhetoric used tries to be objective or subjective, there is always a reason behind the words chosen.  However, if the story happens to be about a cop, the media will treat it very differently than a “normal individual” in the fact that regardless of what a cop does, the media will use rhetoric to support their actions.

I highly recommend you check out the articles written by Wonkette.com and AddictingInfo.org that I referenced here, they are quite an interesting read.

Justice Is Not Fair!

The United States is turning into a police state meaning it is us “citizens” against “the man.”  As a result of this getting justice is becoming a much more difficult task.  The United States started becoming a police state shortly after 9/11 when George W. Bush created homeland security.  Homeland security was created after 9/11 in order to prevent future terrorist attacks.  However, due to its unlimited power to spy on us citizens, it ultimately violates American’s Fourth Amendment right.  This breach extended to the N.S.A., F.B.I. and C.I.A.  Ever since then Americans every day are being ripped of their Constitutional rights.  At first, these rights were only taken from the Federal level, but it seems now it has trickled down to the local law enforcement.

Every city has a police department where local law enforcement has jurisdiction only within that town.  These individuals are “law enforcement citizens” who are there to “protect & serve” the residents of that town.  However, the tide is beginning to shift as “law enforcement citizens” are beginning to see everyone as a threat.  What this means is the “law enforcement citizens” sworn to protect us are becoming the individuals we should fear the most.

On July 5, 2011, a schizophrenic homeless man by the name of Kelly Thomas was filmed being brutally beaten by six “law enforcement citizens” from Fullerton, California.  Kelly Thomas was beaten to the point where he was knocked unconscious and died five days later from his injuries.  Two years later “law enforcement citizens” Manuel Ramos and Jay Cicinelli were on trial for the death of Kelly Thomas.

The video recording of Manuel Ramos, Jay Cicinelli, and the six other “law enforcement citizens” was key evidence in the trial.  However, within less than a day of deliberation, a jury on Monday, January 13, 2014, acquitted Manuel Ramos and Jay Cicinelli of all their actions.  Upon reading of the verdict numerous people were upset as an innocent homeless man was beaten to death and no consequences were given.

Kelly Thomas’s father Rob, a former “law enforcement citizen” said, “the verdict [gives] police ‘carte blanche’ to brutalize people.  ‘All of us need to be very afraid now,’…‘Police officers everywhere can beat us, kill us, whatever they want, but it has been proven right here today they’ll get away with it.’”

Following the verdict, Ramos’ attorney, John Barnett, told reporters: “These peace officers were doing their jobs…they did what they were trained to do.”  In my opinion, this hands down is one of the scariest things I have ever read knowing “law enforcement citizens” are trained to murder the same individuals they are sworn to protect.  This just goes to show “law enforcement citizens” are above the law and justice will never be served if they hurt you or me.

As justice was not served for Kelly Thomas, justice was not served for me.  If you have been following me for some time or read my about page, then you know I became an innocent victim of a police pursuit.  Although, the “law enforcement citizen” who initiated the police pursuit, was off duty, out of his own jurisdiction and on his way to getting his radio fixed as is was broken, a judge ruled that the police department/city of Laguna Beach were immune for my injuries under California vehicle code 17004.7 (for more information read my post 19 Years And Counting.)

So, where am I going with this?  Well, on December 13, 2013, Brian Beaird lead the LAPD on a wild police chase for over an hour.  The police pursuit came to a conclusion when Beaird broadsided a Nissan, where he then proceeded to run on foot.  As Beaird began running, his back was turned to the police along with his arms in the air.  At this point, 3 LAPD officers opened fire shooting Beaird 15 to 20 times killing him.

Following the shooting and death of Beaird, a week later his family filed a $20 million civil claim as a result of what happened.  The lawyer Dale Galipo who is representing the Beaird family said, “the deadly shooting of Brian Newt Beaird, 51,…involving three LAPD officers was ‘malicious’ and ‘criminal.’…it was fortunate that the incident was caught on video, which he said showed Beaird was ‘clearly unarmed’ and ‘clearly not reaching in his waistband or pocket.’”

On Thursday before the announcement of the civil claim, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck said, “After hearing the preliminary briefing, I am very concerned about the circumstances that led up to and resulted in this Officer Involved Shooting,…because of those concerns I have directed that the three involved officers be assigned home pending the final results of the investigation. Determinations regarding training or possible disciplining of the involved officers will be made at that time.”

I think this civil claim and LAPD Chief Charlie Beck’s statements are outrageous.  This just goes to show that even though Brian Beaird was breaking the law by not stopping and leading the LAPD on a police pursuit, he had more rights than me and any other innocent civilians Beaird and the LAPD were endangering.

In recent studies by the California Highway Patrol and Los Angeles Police Department, “More bystanders are injured or killed during high-speed police chases than by stray bullets.  In California, more than 10,000 people have been injured and over 300 people killed because of police chases in the last decade…” and ”Nearly a third of Los Angeles police pursuits end in traffic collisions, and two-thirds of those crashes result in injuries — to suspects, officers, and to innocent bystanders…”  These statistics show police pursuits are beyond dangerous and because of California vehicle code, 17004.7 anyone who becomes an innocent victim has no leg to stand on if something happens to YOU!

Following police pursuits that result in the death or injury of an innocent victim no “law enforcement citizens” are disciplined.  Instead, police chiefs try to justify their actions and blame the criminal is fully responsible.  When are “law enforcement citizens” going to learn that they are just as responsible and reckless as the criminals running from them.

As for the civil rights claim, the Beaird family has not received any money yet, but Galipo said, “he hoped a settlement could be reached with the police department before then.” (Referring to the 45 days the city of Los Angeles has to respond to the civil case.)  My question is when did cops no longer become your friends?  Why do criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens?  When did to “protect & serve” become shoot first ask questions later?  And finally, if this is the way “law enforcement” acts today, what does the future hold?

These are legitimate questions to ask as everyone is now presumed guilty as homeland security and the N.S.A. spy program are violating everyone’s rights.  Edward Snowden the former N.S.A. contractor should not be prosecuted for leaking classified documents to the media.  Edward Snowden should be seen as a patriot as he let the American people know that their government is not following the U.S. Constitution.

In March of 1971, eight, anti-war protesters known as the F.B.I burglars released documents to the media outlining the extent of J. Edgar Hoover’s domestic spy program.  “Ultimately, the Media burglary helped lay bare an extensive domestic spying program, known as ‘Cointelpro,’ a clandestine system of life-shattering assaults on Hoover’s enemies.  The revelation prompted a major overhaul of the bureau by the U.S. Senate.  Even the FBI website today acknowledges the role the Media burglary played in this ‘significant re-evaluation.’”  So, if the F.B.I. burglars are seen as patriots, should not Edward Snowden be?

So, where is the United States going to be in 10, 20 or 30 years?  God is the only one who knows.  However, if the trend continues the way it is going, I could see the fictional government portrayed in V for Vendetta coming true.  So, remember, Guy Fawkes and “Remember, Remember the 5th of November.”

Frustrated, But Not Discouraged!

Hey Everyone, Before I go into my rant about how frustrating it is being a quadriplegic dependent on a respirator, I need to go back and explain what exactly happened to me, so here it is…

Just as every morning comes, I woke up on July 11, 1994, ready to start my day, but little did I know that in a few short hours my life as I knew it would forever be changed.  On July 11th I was heading to a church camp at Voyagers in Irvine, California when I became an innocent victim of a police pursuit.  My mom was driving my sister (who was in the front passenger seat) and I (in the middle backseat) when a criminal who was fleeing from the police ran a red light broadsiding our vehicle.  As a result, the accident left me a (C1, C2) quadriplegic dependent on a respirator, where my mom and sister were fine.

July 11, 1994, has forever been and always will be a memory in my mind, because not only did I become a quadriplegic that day, but I actually was not supposed to live.  In fact, the only reason I am even here today is that a nurse happened to witness the accident and gave me mouth to mouth until the paramedics arrived.  Right after the accident, I was transferred to Western Medical Center in Santa Ana, California to see if I was going to be okay.  During this time then and even to this day, I have no recollection of the events because I was in a coma due to the impact of the speeding car, which was equivalent to me falling from a 7-story building.  For the first time since my accident almost 19 years ago my dad told me what that day was like for him on January 30, 2013.

At the time of the accident, my dad worked at the Orange County Sanitation District where he was the lab supervisor.  Upon his work hearing about the accident from my family, his work was trying to find him because he was in a meeting and not in his office.  When my dad’s work finally found him, another individual drove him to the hospital in fear that he may get in a car accident himself.  As my dad reached Western Medical Center, he was escorted into a small room where he was told by doctors to start preparing for after-death arrangements because they did not think I was going to live 24 hours, which no parent ever wants hear.  My dad who was in shock at hearing this wanted to speak to me, but the doctors informed him that I could not speak because I was in a coma from the accident.

As a result of being in a coma from the accident and suffering a spinal cord injury impairing me from breathing on my own, no one knew if there was brain damage or the severity of the injury.  In order to find out the severity doctors wanted me to wake up on my own.  My dad was against this because he was scared I would be frightened now that I had tubes and IVs attached to my body.  When I woke up for the first time, I had a tube in my mouth, and my mom and dad were at the foot of my bed.  I still remember the first words my mom said, “Hi honey, we were in a car accident.”

After the initial moment I woke up, the rest of my experience at the hospital is somewhat a blur.  My dad told me after I woke up the medical team did all sorts of tests on me specifically to see if I could feel my legs, arms, and body.  To this day the only part of my experience at the hospital that I remember was watching Free Willy and eating Haagen Dazs Cookies and Cream.  I eventually was discharged from Western Medical Center several weeks later and went to a rehabilitation center.

I officially did not return home until sometime in early October, three months after my accident.  The day I left the rehabilitation center for home was joyous and scary at the same time.  The last time I left my house I was a normal 7-year-old kid who was able to walk, run, and play games with friends, but now I was an 8-year-old going home in a wheelchair and on a respirator.  I had been in a hospital room for nearly three months, and the comfort of four walls around me felt as if I was home; to others that may have felt like being in prison.

When we pulled up to our house the memories of the past filled my brain because I thought everything was going to go back to normal, but that just shows the innocents of a child’s mind. Our house was located on the corner of a block, and everyone pulled up to the side in order to drop individuals off at our house.  However, the side of our house was lined with grass and had a hill that went up to our front door where steps lay.  I thought that was the way I was going to enter my home, but I was wrong.

Instead of pulling up to the side of our house we drove to the back alley and entered through the garage.  Upon entering my backyard through the detached garage, my parents rolled me up to our back door and brought me inside.  It had been so long since I had been home that it felt as if I was a stranger.  My room, which was upstairs was no longer accessible to me and had been moved downstairs in the dining room. Life as I previously knew it had forever changed.

I eventually went back to school in April of 1995, missing the majority of what should have been my third-grade class.  So instead of trying to learn everything in a few short months, my parents decided to hold me back and repeat those last few months of second-grade.  I eventually graduated from elementary school in 1999, middle school in 2001, high school in 2005, and believe it or not I graduated from college in 2011.  This is where my frustration begins.

Two years after my accident I became friend’s with Jane Seymour (Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman) and James Keach (Producer – Walk the Line) where they encouraged me to pursue a career in film because they said, “There is nothing we do you cannot.”  When I was young Jane and James would try to show me the art of filmmaking whenever I was on the set of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Women, but unfortunately, because I was so young I did not have any interest.  It was not until I was 16 years old during the summer of 2003, that I realized that maybe Jane and James were right.

James Keach, Ozzy Smith and I on the set of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman located at the Paramount Ranch in Agoura Hills

James Keach (Director), Roland “Ozzie” Smith (Cinematographer) and I on the set of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman located at the Paramount Ranch in Agoura Hills

Since I decided to try and pursue a career in film, I needed to learn how to become a filmmaker myself by going to film school.  Jane and James told me I should attend Chapman University’s — Dodge College of Film and Media Arts, in Orange, California.  When I entered Chapman, my goal was for me to become a director, but I soon found out my real passion was in producing.

There were two main reasons why I did not like directing: first, I did not like everyone looking at me in order to tell them where to go in terms of how to make the film and second, I did not like the fact that I hated every film I made.  What I really enjoyed about producing was that I was still apart of the creative process, but was not directly in charge of creating the actual film — that is the director.  Being a producer kind of feels like a parent handing over the keys to the car after their 16-year-old just got their drivers license.  The 16-year-old took the classes, passed the test and hopefully they will make smart decisions.

After six years at Chapman, I graduated in 2011, with a Bachelors of Fine Arts in Film Production.  What is frustrating me about being a quadriplegic is I have never had a job in the industry and all my friends who I graduated with have.  The only way I ever see myself getting a job is if I successfully sell a script and some how get a producer credit, which is a 1 out of million chance.  The odds of making it in the film industry are very low for normal individuals who do not have physical disabilities, so the odds are even more stacked up against me.

Even though my friends have jobs in the industry, no one has made it big yet, but at least they are either working for someone prominent in the film industry or doing grunt work, which I cannot do.  So here I am with a degree in film and a very functioning brain, but the only thing I can do is either read books, write (which I am not very good at) or take classes at a community college, which is not a job or a career.  I feel as if I am in limbo.

Although I am frustrated with being a quadriplegic right now, I do some what believe my accident has been a blessing.  I have experienced a life that is drastically different, and it has made me who I am today.  I have no idea where I am going to be in five or ten years, whether I will be a successful producer or just a professional student, but I guess I am just going to see when I get there…

The following link is an article written about me in The Los Angeles Times, the day after the accident.