Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/30/2009 4:32:17 AM EDT
From today's Anchorage Daily News

Finally, after nearly seven long years, this Alaska State Trooper (think: Mike Wooten) will face a jury.


Jury should hear trooper shooting case, judge says

OSBORN: Parents of man who was killed are suing law officer.

By LISA DEMER
ldemer@adn.com

(12/29/09 21:37:59)
When Alaska State Trooper Jesse Osborn shot and killed an unarmed man at a Kenai highway pullout nearly seven years ago, was he acting with a legitimate police purpose?

That's a question that a jury likely will decide, under a recent ruling by a federal judge.

The shooting happened early on Jan. 4, 2003. A snowplow operator had called in a suspicious vehicle at the pullout off the Sterling Highway. Osborn and another trooper, Joseph Whittom, responded. A trooper investigation found that Casey Porter, who was disabled and used a cane to walk, didn't follow Osborn's orders to get out of his car. Osborn pepper-sprayed him, then, seconds later as Porter's car moved forward, fired five shots, killing the man, the trooper investigation found.

After the shooting, Osborn told investigators he thought Porter's car was going to hit Whittom and that he shot to protect his fellow officer.

Porter's parents, Arthur and Kristie Porter, are suing Osborn in federal court. Osborn has been trying to get the case tossed without a trial, on the basis that he has immunity as a law enforcement officer.

U.S. District Judge John Sedwick ruled against him in 2007 and he took the matter to the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. A three-judge panel in October 2008 clarified the standard for deciding the case, considering the fast-moving circumstances of the incident.

"Here the events in the pullout were in constant flux, with much yelling, confusion and a driver who was refusing to exit or stop his car. To be sure, the record contains facts suggesting that Osborn's own conduct created and agitated this escalating situation and that his reactions were disproportionate to the situation he faced," Judge Raymond Fisher wrote in the opinion.

For the Porters to win, the appellate panel ruled, "they must demonstrate that Osborn acted with a purpose to harm Casey that was unrelated to legitimate law enforcement objectives." The 9th Circuit sent the case back to Sedwick.

Now in his new ruling, one of several issued earlier this month, Sedwick wrote that Osborn's motives in firing into Porter's vehicle were in dispute, so the case should be decided by a jury unless the two sides could reach a settlement.

Osborn had argued that his only motive was to protect Whittom. But Sedwick noted that right after the shooting, the other trooper told investigators that he "couldn't believe that shots were fired in a situation like this."

Sedwick wrote that "the question remains whether Osborn perhaps sought to 'get even' or teach Casey a lesson for attempting to flee the scene, refusing to keep his hands on the steering wheel, or otherwise objecting to his detention."

Among other issues covered in Sedwick's Dec. 17 order:

• A ruling that a newspaper story about Osborn's history as a trooper would not be allowed as evidence. But the judge didn't rule out testimony from people who had violent or questionable confrontations with Osborn.

• A ruling denying a request to bar Porter's toxicology reports. The judge said he needed more information.

The Porters contend their son's condition didn't give Osborn cause to shoot and jurors shouldn't hear about it.

"The Defense wishes to establish that Casey Porter was a hopped-up, drug addict laying in wait at a turnout along the Kenai Keys with a desire to run down a police officer. Not only is the description wrong, such description defies the events in this case," Mark Osterman, the Porters' attorney, wrote in a court filing.

The judge scheduled a hearing for May 11 to set a trial but urged everyone to try to negotiate an end to the case before that.

In February 2006, the state settled an earlier suit with different plaintiffs for $310,000. It was filed on behalf of Porter's estate, represented by the mother of one of Porter's children.

Osborn resigned from the troopers in 2007 to pursue a career in sailing, according to a Department of Public Safety newsletter.

Efforts to reach Osterman and Ruth Botstein, the assistant attorney general representing Osborn, were unsuccessful Tuesday.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 4:53:45 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 5:10:48 AM EDT
So this is a civil case not a criminal one?

He was cleared already.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 5:21:01 AM EDT
Need more info and the 27 8x10 color glossy photos.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 6:15:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
So the trooper thought he was defending the other trooper who he thought was about to be run over by a drunk driver?

I predict a not guilty verdict.

Please keep us up dated.

Bama,

Where in the thread, or the linked ADN page, do you see mention of Casey Porter being 'drunk'?

If you are referring to this: "• A ruling denying a request to bar Porter's toxicology reports. The judge said he needed more information."

I would hardly call that a verification of intoxication.


Link Posted: 12/30/2009 6:19:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2009 6:20:15 AM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 6:43:48 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
So the trooper thought he was defending the other trooper who he thought was about to be run over by a drunk driver?

I predict a not guilty verdict.

Please keep us up dated.


Not that simple, it seems:


"Here the events in the pullout were in constant flux, with much yelling, confusion and a driver who was refusing to exit or stop his car. To be sure, the record contains facts suggesting that Osborn's own conduct created and agitated this escalating situation and that his reactions were disproportionate to the situation he faced," Judge Raymond Fisher wrote in the opinion...

Osborn had argued that his only motive was to protect Whittom. But Sedwick noted that right after the shooting, the other trooper told investigators that he "couldn't believe that shots were fired in a situation like this."
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 6:48:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Aimless:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
So the trooper thought he was defending the other trooper who he thought was about to be run over by a drunk driver?

I predict a not guilty verdict.

Please keep us up dated.

They aren't trying to keep the dead guys toxicology report out because it showed he ate too many christmas cookies and was hopped up on sugar.

edit interesting that the state paid out on the estate claim of the kids on the same fact pattern.


No, but they referred to him as a drug addict, which means the report probably shows he uses drugs. The problem is drug use will show up well after the effects, that can lead a jury to believe he was high, even though there may be no evidence of him actually being high during the incident.

Trying to justify shooting someone when the person you are protecting(Whittom) thinks you shouldn't have done it probably makes the case un-winnable in a jury case.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 8:03:49 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 8:06:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:30:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
So the trooper thought he was defending the other trooper who he thought was about to be run over by a drunk driver?

I predict a not guilty verdict.

Please keep us up dated.


I'm predicting, now that it is in the courts and cannot be derailed by the AST Union, will end up in a conviction for the Trooper.

Your knee-jerk defense of Osborn is, well, predictable. There is no way this is a good shoot. And there's no way a jury will find a good cause for a Trooper to pepper-spray a handicapped man who cannot easily get out of his car, then shoot him five times when he tries to flee.

I'll enjoy posting an update when he is convicted, when he is sentenced and when he is first sent to the prison infirmary for being beaten to a pulp after being ass-raped.

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:35:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
So this is a civil case not a criminal one?

He was cleared already.


Civil.

Of course he was cleared, the Alaska State Troopers cover their own.

Osborn, like Mike Wooten, has a history.

This was not a clean shoot.

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:39:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2009 12:40:33 PM EDT by SGB]
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:40:06 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SGB:

Originally Posted By joe-bananas:

I'll enjoy posting an update when he is convicted, when he is sentenced and when he is first sent to the prison infirmary for being beaten to a pulp after being ass-raped.


You do realize that this is a civil lawsuit, not a criminal case don't you?


Yeah, got ahead of myself.

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:40:08 PM EDT
Isn't Wooten the dipshit who tasered his son?

AC
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:40:30 PM EDT
Excerpt of confrontation between trooper Jesse Osborn and Casey Porter in January 2003

Recording details exchange that led to fatal shooting

(08/07/08 07:54:14)

The exchange between Casey Porter and trooper Arthur Jesse Osborn at a pullout off the Sterling Highway turned deadly in less than a minute. Here is an excerpt from a transcript of the tape recording Osborn made of the encounter. The recorded dialogue began about 20 seconds after Porter began to drive away. Trooper Joe Whittom was standing just outside of his patrol car nearby.

Osborn:Get out of the car, now! Get out of the car.

Porter:What's wrong, sir?

Whittom: (Indiscernible)

Osborn:Get out of the car.

Whittom: Throw up your hands, get in your veh- get out of your vehicle!

Porter:OK. No, no problem. I'll back up.

Osborn:No, you won't back up, you will get out of the car now.

Whittom: No! Get out, now!

Osborn:Do you understand me?

Whittom: (Indiscernible)

Porter: Yes, sir.

Osborn:You will get out of that car - show me your hands! Open the door, close, now!

Whittom: (To troopers dispatch) Soldotna, 1-E-20 (his trooper ID code), we got him stopped.

Osborn:(To Whittom) Get that Taser out. (To Porter) Open the door now.

Whittom: Turn off your vehicle!

Porter: What's wrong, sir? I was just parked.

Osborn:OK, open the door now.

(Two seconds later, there's the sound of pepper spray.)

Porter: Ahhh. I didn't do nothing!

Osborn:Tell him he's been sprayed. Get out!

(Five shots fired.)

Osborn: Shots, shots fired. Soldotna, 1-E-16 (his trooper ID code), shots fired. We're 10-60 (OK). Get medics 10-19 (to the scene). You OK, Whittom?

Whittom: Yeah.

Osborn:He was headed straight for you.

Whittom: (To dispatch) Soldotna, 1-E-20 ...

Osborn:10-4, suspect. (Pause) It's the Kenai Keys pullout. I can see his hands. I believe he's 79 (dead). I can't see his, I can see his right hand. Are you OK, did your car hit you?

Whittom: No, he hit my car.

(Pause)

Osborn:God, I thought he was gonna kill you. He doesn't–– he's not wearing any pants.

Whittom: Yeah.

Osborn:Looks like there's a marijuana pipe in the front. OK. It doesn't look like he has any weapons, let's get him out of there. I couldn't open the door, I tried. (Pause) OK, I'm gonna holster my weapon, keep him covered. (Pause) You sure you're OK?

Whittom: Yeah, I'm OK. It's ...

Osborn:God, I saw him hit that car.

Whittom: (Indiscernible) the vehicle bumped me a little bit and kinda ...

Osborn:I saw him hit the gas and he was headed straight for you aiming with his steering wheel. (Pause) I'm gonna check pulse. I'm gonna handcuff him first, he was still clenching his fists a second ago. (Pause) All-right, that glove's not working.

(Radio traffic in background)

Osborn:Just cover him. He's still moving, I think that's just a reaction however. I'm gonna get in the passenger's side, cuff him. (Pause) It's locked. I'm gonna break it out with my baton. (Sound of baton breaking passenger side front window) 10-4, we're 10-60 (OK), I believe the subject's 10-79 (dead). (Pause) 10-4 and we are 10-60. Just cover him from the rear. (Pause; sound of radio traffic in background) OK. Time is 0216. Suspect isn't wearing any pants. No me- no vehicles have been moved since point of impact when Trooper Whittom's vehicle was struck. Trooper Whittom was on the other side of his vehicle, the side that had moved towards, instruct the suspect to stop and not move his vehicle. He immediately hit the gas, grasping the steering wheel with both hands, aiming for Trooper Whittom with his headlights on. I fired on the suspect. He's believed to be deceased at this point. He's been restrained. We don't see any weapons right in the vehicle immediately. Looks like some pornographic material. Suspect's not wearing any shoes. Looks like he's got a cane. I, I believe I know who this is. He was a suspect. I, I believe he's 10-99 (wanted). I'm gonna make a phone call, be off record.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:41:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
So this is a civil case not a criminal one?

He was cleared already.


Civil.

Of course he was cleared, the Alaska State Troopers cover their own.

Osborn, like Mike Wooten, has a history.

This was not a clean shoot.



Since you have made a conclusion, why don't you share the details then?
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:44:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By AC_Doctor:
Isn't Wooten the dipshit who tasered his son?

AC


Tasered his son.

Poached moose.

Swilled a beer, popped the top on a second one, chugged half of it then got in his cruiser and began his shift.

Threatened to kill his father-in-law if he helped his wife get a divorce lawyer.

Got severely buzzed, started a bar fight, pulled his badge and gun when he started getting his ass kicked, then jumped in his car and pursued the guy who kicked his ass. Was then pulled over by a Wasilla cop, but let him go out of 'professional courtesy.' No telling what he would have blown, but that fact really doesn't matter.

His union rep, John Cyr, did a nice job of keeping Wooten employed.

Not sure if he was also representing Osborn.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:45:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RDP:
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
So this is a civil case not a criminal one?

He was cleared already.


Civil.

Of course he was cleared, the Alaska State Troopers cover their own.

Osborn, like Mike Wooten, has a history.

This was not a clean shoot.



Since you have made a conclusion, why don't you share the details then?


First, details are sealed. We learned that during the Wooten case.

Second, it's just another brick in the wall. The Alaska State Troopers Wall of Honor.

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:49:31 PM EDT
And a little something from the Juneau Empire

Trooper who shot man had history of conflicts

ANCHORAGE - Several incidents have turned up in Arthur Jesse Osborn's past in a review conducted after the Alaska State Trooper shot and killed an uncooperative disabled man on a highway turnout in January.
During his short time on the force, Osborn, 26, has tussled with a lost Japanese tourist. He frightened a neighborhood grocery store owner whose business had been burglarized. He pepper-sprayed a teenager in the back of a Bronco and wrestled a paraplegic into a headlock, according to reports.

Several people whose encounters with Osborn went awry said the trooper escalated confrontations.

"In Japan, such an unruly way never happens," said Kyouji Hiramatsu, 31, who said he was roughed up by Osborn in confusion over his passport.

Osborn, a former wrestler from Seward, started in law enforcement as a corrections officer at the Spring Creek Correctional Center, home to Alaska's most dangerous felons. In March 2001, he joined the troopers. He is among a large group of young officers stepping in to replace veterans hired in the 1980s boom years and now retiring in waves.

On Jan. 4, Osborn was working the graveyard shift out of the Soldotna trooper post. He and trooper Joseph Whittom were called to check out a suspicious sedan in a pullout off the Sterling Highway.

Inside was Casey Porter, 30. Porter was disabled from a car crash in August and used a cane to work the clutch.

Osborn ordered Porter to show his hands and step out. When he didn't comply, Osborn blasted him with pepper spray, a nonlethal but painful weapon used by troopers to tame suspects.

Porter didn't surrender. Instead, his car moved forward, toward Whittom. Though Whittom's patrol car was between him and Porter's moving sedan, Osborn feared for the other officer's safety and fired his pistol five times at Porter, according to troopers. Three rounds hit Porter in the back and one in the shoulder. Porter died at the scene.

After three days of administrative leave and a fit-for-duty psychological assessment, both troopers were back on patrol. Osborn has since been transferred to the Palmer post.

Troopers said they could not discuss Osborn's record because of privacy concerns and the ongoing investigation into whether the shooting was justified.

Some people now accusing Osborn of rough treatment have criminal records. But that doesn't give police free rein, said Joe Ray Skrha, who represents criminal defendants in Kenai.

"It's become a regular occurrence for clients to report excessive force on a regular basis by officer Osborn," Skrha said.

Officers aren't supposed to resort to force if people cooperate, said Maj. Doug Norris, deputy director of troopers. But an officer who does use force repeatedly may simply be the first to respond to gun calls, drunken fights or domestic disputes, Norris said.

If citizens have concerns about any trooper, they should bring them to troopers' attention, Norris said.

"I don't want to have a trooper that is abusing people or demeaning people or that makes people feel bad the way they talk to them," Norris said. "We don't tolerate that."

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:49:50 PM EDT
The Phantom Dolphin Polisher will never again terrorize the highways rest stops of Alaska....
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:53:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By RDP:
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
So this is a civil case not a criminal one?

He was cleared already.


Civil.

Of course he was cleared, the Alaska State Troopers cover their own.

Osborn, like Mike Wooten, has a history.

This was not a clean shoot.



Since you have made a conclusion, why don't you share the details then?


First, details are sealed. We learned that during the Wooten case.

Second, it's just another brick in the wall. The Alaska State Troopers Wall of Honor.



How can details be sealed when there is a civil suit, which has already gone to appeal?

Something isn't right there, as the facts are surely out there. The transcript is, so how are things sealed?

As for the complaints, well, not much there either. Need more details to come to a conclusion.

I have been accused of everything, from rape to murder. If accusations will sway your opinion, you have no idea what complaints the police really receive. There is a difference between complaints and sustained complaints.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:57:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RDP:
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By RDP:
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By TheTracker:
So this is a civil case not a criminal one?

He was cleared already.


Civil.

Of course he was cleared, the Alaska State Troopers cover their own.

Osborn, like Mike Wooten, has a history.

This was not a clean shoot.



Since you have made a conclusion, why don't you share the details then?


First, details are sealed. We learned that during the Wooten case.

Second, it's just another brick in the wall. The Alaska State Troopers Wall of Honor.



How can details be sealed when there is a civil suit, which has already gone to appeal?

Something isn't right there, as the facts are surely out there. The transcript is, so how are things sealed?

As for the complaints, well, not much there either. Need more details to come to a conclusion.

I have been accused of everything, from rape to murder. If accusations will sway your opinion, you have no idea what complaints the police really receive. There is a difference between complaints and sustained complaints.


Link Posted: 12/30/2009 12:58:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2009 1:00:31 PM EDT by RDP]
If there is a civil suit in place, the information is already out there.

In fact, there is probably more info now than there was before.

ETA- even the article says the attorney released the information.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:13:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2009 1:15:15 PM EDT by OHGUNNER]

Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
From today's Anchorage Daily News

Finally, after nearly seven long years, this Alaska State Trooper (think: Mike Wooten) will face a jury.


Jury should hear trooper shooting case, judge says

OSBORN: Parents of man who was killed are suing law officer.

By LISA DEMER
ldemer@adn.com

(12/29/09 21:37:59)
When Alaska State Trooper Jesse Osborn shot and killed an unarmed man at a Kenai highway pullout nearly seven years ago, was he acting with a legitimate police purpose?

That's a question that a jury likely will decide, under a recent ruling by a federal judge.

The shooting happened early on Jan. 4, 2003. A snowplow operator had called in a suspicious vehicle at the pullout off the Sterling Highway. Osborn and another trooper, Joseph Whittom, responded. A trooper investigation found that Casey Porter, who was disabled and used a cane to walk, didn't follow Osborn's orders to get out of his car. Osborn pepper-sprayed him, then, seconds later as Porter's car moved forward, fired five shots, killing the man, the trooper investigation found.

After the shooting, Osborn told investigators he thought Porter's car was going to hit Whittom and that he shot to protect his fellow officer.

Porter's parents, Arthur and Kristie Porter, are suing Osborn in federal court. Osborn has been trying to get the case tossed without a trial, on the basis that he has immunity as a law enforcement officer.

U.S. District Judge John Sedwick ruled against him in 2007 and he took the matter to the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. A three-judge panel in October 2008 clarified the standard for deciding the case, considering the fast-moving circumstances of the incident.

"Here the events in the pullout were in constant flux, with much yelling, confusion and a driver who was refusing to exit or stop his car. To be sure, the record contains facts suggesting that Osborn's own conduct created and agitated this escalating situation and that his reactions were disproportionate to the situation he faced," Judge Raymond Fisher wrote in the opinion.

For the Porters to win, the appellate panel ruled, "they must demonstrate that Osborn acted with a purpose to harm Casey that was unrelated to legitimate law enforcement objectives." The 9th Circuit sent the case back to Sedwick.

Now in his new ruling, one of several issued earlier this month, Sedwick wrote that Osborn's motives in firing into Porter's vehicle were in dispute, so the case should be decided by a jury unless the two sides could reach a settlement.

Osborn had argued that his only motive was to protect Whittom. But Sedwick noted that right after the shooting, the other trooper told investigators that he "couldn't believe that shots were fired in a situation like this."

Sedwick wrote that "the question remains whether Osborn perhaps sought to 'get even' or teach Casey a lesson for attempting to flee the scene, refusing to keep his hands on the steering wheel, or otherwise objecting to his detention."

Among other issues covered in Sedwick's Dec. 17 order:

• A ruling that a newspaper story about Osborn's history as a trooper would not be allowed as evidence. But the judge didn't rule out testimony from people who had violent or questionable confrontations with Osborn.

• A ruling denying a request to bar Porter's toxicology reports. The judge said he needed more information.

The Porters contend their son's condition didn't give Osborn cause to shoot and jurors shouldn't hear about it.

"The Defense wishes to establish that Casey Porter was a hopped-up, drug addict laying in wait at a turnout along the Kenai Keys with a desire to run down a police officer. Not only is the description wrong, such description defies the events in this case," Mark Osterman, the Porters' attorney, wrote in a court filing.

The judge scheduled a hearing for May 11 to set a trial but urged everyone to try to negotiate an end to the case before that.

In February 2006, the state settled an earlier suit with different plaintiffs for $310,000. It was filed on behalf of Porter's estate, represented by the mother of one of Porter's children.

Osborn resigned from the troopers in 2007 to pursue a career in sailing, according to a Department of Public Safety newsletter.

Efforts to reach Osterman and Ruth Botstein, the assistant attorney general representing Osborn, were unsuccessful Tuesday.

Lawsuits happen anytime an LEO is involved in a fatal confrontation with a suspect. It's SOP for the suspects family to go after the department and officers involved. I ought to know because I've been involved in two fatal confrontations in my career. One can file a lawsuit for anything, doesn't mean the trooper was wrong, but since this is ARFCOM GD I know minds are quickly made up with little to no facts.

What was the conclusion on the internal investigation? What was the DA investigation results? What were the toxicology results? This is public record , don't know why this is not opened unless sealed for legal reasons.


Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:20:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2009 1:20:44 PM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:25:14 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Aimless:
Based on that transcript it sounds like dead guy was a drunken idiot (with no pants wtf?) who tried to run over the cop. Cop may have been a moose poaching wife beating ass, but the guy refused to get out of the car confronted by two cops and I bet he really did drive into the police car-sure the two cops could have said stuff knowing it was taped to make them look good, but that's extremely unlikely.


You're right. He deserved to be executed for having his pants off in his car while a pot pipe was on the seat.


Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:29:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By Aimless:
Based on that transcript it sounds like dead guy was a drunken idiot (with no pants wtf?) who tried to run over the cop. Cop may have been a moose poaching wife beating ass, but the guy refused to get out of the car confronted by two cops and I bet he really did drive into the police car-sure the two cops could have said stuff knowing it was taped to make them look good, but that's extremely unlikely.


You're right. He deserved to be executed for having his pants off in his car while a pot pipe was on the seat.



No the part where he try's to run over the cop is what got him killed. Can't fix stupid.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:30:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2009 1:33:52 PM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:40:59 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Aimless:

Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By Aimless:
Based on that transcript it sounds like dead guy was a drunken idiot (with no pants wtf?) who tried to run over the cop. Cop may have been a moose poaching wife beating ass, but the guy refused to get out of the car confronted by two cops and I bet he really did drive into the police car-sure the two cops could have said stuff knowing it was taped to make them look good, but that's extremely unlikely.


You're right. He deserved to be executed for having his pants off in his car while a pot pipe was on the seat.



He got shot for trying to run over a cop. It's not like the guy was an Allstate insurance adjuster stopping by the side of the road to call his parish priest to see if he needed help at Bingo that night. I bet the guy was intoxicated or on drugs (otherwise no issue over tox screen). This is a great reason to execute the guy. Two police officers told him to get the fuck out of the car and he argued with them and tried to move the car. And did you miss the part where the driver was paralyzed from the waist down and could not get out of the car? Sorry but when two cops are yelling at you to do something the only reason you don't do it is you're fucking blitzed out of your mind or have decided to take them on. The dude had no pants on, I'll go out on a limb and say he was not in his right mind and did something stupid that got him shot. Again, not a good reason to execute the person. Worse, the fact that we as Americans have come to believe that this is normal behavior for cops. Shoot first, ask questions later. I have been REAAAAALLY shitfaced and never went for a drive without my trousers.

I know some bad cops, I know some crooked cops. If you told me one of them called you a dickhead when you got a ticket going through my town I would believe you, if you told me one of them wrote you a ticket and you are pretty sure it was because your girlfriend who was riding with you was black, I might buy that also, if you told me they offered to let your sister off the hook for a blow job I would buy that also. All that evil, nasty bullshit is a whole world apart from saying that a cop, with another officer as a witness, came on a drunk dude with no pants and just gunned him down for shits and giggles all while acting out a whole fake scenario for the tape recording. I grew up with cops. I have buddies who are cops. I have family who are cops. They have their canned lines and cover for each other. I still believe this was a bad shoot. There is no justification for dumping five bullets into this guy, especially with Osborn's record of violence and escalation. Perhaps that's why he is no longer an Alaska State Trooper and also why this has gone through the gate of the 9th Circuit (though I normally say Circus) Court of Appeals.


Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:40:59 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Aimless:

Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By Aimless:
Based on that transcript it sounds like dead guy was a drunken idiot (with no pants wtf?) who tried to run over the cop. Cop may have been a moose poaching wife beating ass, but the guy refused to get out of the car confronted by two cops and I bet he really did drive into the police car-sure the two cops could have said stuff knowing it was taped to make them look good, but that's extremely unlikely.


You're right. He deserved to be executed for having his pants off in his car while a pot pipe was on the seat.



He got shot for trying to run over a cop. It's not like the guy was an Allstate insurance adjuster stopping by the side of the road to call his parish priest to see if he needed help at Bingo that night. I bet the guy was intoxicated or on drugs (otherwise no issue over tox screen). This is a great reason to execute the guy. Two police officers told him to get the fuck out of the car and he argued with them and tried to move the car. And did you miss the part where the driver was paralyzed from the waist down and could not get out of the car? Sorry but when two cops are yelling at you to do something the only reason you don't do it is you're fucking blitzed out of your mind or have decided to take them on. The dude had no pants on, I'll go out on a limb and say he was not in his right mind and did something stupid that got him shot. Again, not a good reason to execute the person. Worse, the fact that we as Americans have come to believe that this is normal behavior for cops. Shoot first, ask questions later. I have been REAAAAALLY shitfaced and never went for a drive without my trousers.

I know some bad cops, I know some crooked cops. If you told me one of them called you a dickhead when you got a ticket going through my town I would believe you, if you told me one of them wrote you a ticket and you are pretty sure it was because your girlfriend who was riding with you was black, I might buy that also, if you told me they offered to let your sister off the hook for a blow job I would buy that also. All that evil, nasty bullshit is a whole world apart from saying that a cop, with another officer as a witness, came on a drunk dude with no pants and just gunned him down for shits and giggles all while acting out a whole fake scenario for the tape recording. I grew up with cops. I have buddies who are cops. I have family who are cops. They have their canned lines and cover for each other. I still believe this was a bad shoot. There is no justification for dumping five bullets into this guy, especially with Osborn's record of violence and escalation. Perhaps that's why he is no longer an Alaska State Trooper and also why this has gone through the gate of the 9th Circuit (though I normally say Circus) Court of Appeals.


Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:43:48 PM EDT
I started reading this thread ready to cast blame on the trooper but after reading all the information given it appears to be a good shoot.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:45:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By Aimless:

Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By Aimless:
Based on that transcript it sounds like dead guy was a drunken idiot (with no pants wtf?) who tried to run over the cop. Cop may have been a moose poaching wife beating ass, but the guy refused to get out of the car confronted by two cops and I bet he really did drive into the police car-sure the two cops could have said stuff knowing it was taped to make them look good, but that's extremely unlikely.


You're right. He deserved to be executed for having his pants off in his car while a pot pipe was on the seat.



He got shot for trying to run over a cop. It's not like the guy was an Allstate insurance adjuster stopping by the side of the road to call his parish priest to see if he needed help at Bingo that night. I bet the guy was intoxicated or on drugs (otherwise no issue over tox screen). This is a great reason to execute the guy. Two police officers told him to get the fuck out of the car and he argued with them and tried to move the car. And did you miss the part where the driver was paralyzed from the waist down and could not get out of the car? Sorry but when two cops are yelling at you to do something the only reason you don't do it is you're fucking blitzed out of your mind or have decided to take them on. The dude had no pants on, I'll go out on a limb and say he was not in his right mind and did something stupid that got him shot. Again, not a good reason to execute the person. Worse, the fact that we as Americans have come to believe that this is normal behavior for cops. Shoot first, ask questions later. I have been REAAAAALLY shitfaced and never went for a drive without my trousers.

I know some bad cops, I know some crooked cops. If you told me one of them called you a dickhead when you got a ticket going through my town I would believe you, if you told me one of them wrote you a ticket and you are pretty sure it was because your girlfriend who was riding with you was black, I might buy that also, if you told me they offered to let your sister off the hook for a blow job I would buy that also. All that evil, nasty bullshit is a whole world apart from saying that a cop, with another officer as a witness, came on a drunk dude with no pants and just gunned him down for shits and giggles all while acting out a whole fake scenario for the tape recording. I grew up with cops. I have buddies who are cops. I have family who are cops. They have their canned lines and cover for each other. I still believe this was a bad shoot. There is no justification for dumping five bullets into this guy, especially with Osborn's record of violence and escalation. Perhaps that's why he is no longer an Alaska State Trooper and also why this has gone through the gate of the 9th Circuit (though I normally say Circus) Court of Appeals.



Can't argue logic and reason when you're not reasonable yourself. Your arguing what you want to believe happened, not the facts as they're known.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 1:49:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
And a little something from the Juneau Empire

Trooper who shot man had history of conflicts

ANCHORAGE - Several incidents have turned up in Arthur Jesse Osborn's past in a review conducted after the Alaska State Trooper shot and killed an uncooperative disabled man on a highway turnout in January.
During his short time on the force, Osborn, 26, has tussled with a lost Japanese tourist. He frightened a neighborhood grocery store owner whose business had been burglarized. He pepper-sprayed a teenager in the back of a Bronco and wrestled a paraplegic into a headlock, according to reports.

Several people whose encounters with Osborn went awry said the trooper escalated confrontations.

"In Japan, such an unruly way never happens," said Kyouji Hiramatsu, 31, who said he was roughed up by Osborn in confusion over his passport.

Osborn, a former wrestler from Seward, started in law enforcement as a corrections officer at the Spring Creek Correctional Center, home to Alaska's most dangerous felons. In March 2001, he joined the troopers. He is among a large group of young officers stepping in to replace veterans hired in the 1980s boom years and now retiring in waves.

On Jan. 4, Osborn was working the graveyard shift out of the Soldotna trooper post. He and trooper Joseph Whittom were called to check out a suspicious sedan in a pullout off the Sterling Highway.

Inside was Casey Porter, 30. Porter was disabled from a car crash in August and used a cane to work the clutch.

Osborn ordered Porter to show his hands and step out. When he didn't comply, Osborn blasted him with pepper spray, a nonlethal but painful weapon used by troopers to tame suspects.

Porter didn't surrender. Instead, his car moved forward, toward Whittom. Though Whittom's patrol car was between him and Porter's moving sedan, Osborn feared for the other officer's safety and fired his pistol five times at Porter, according to troopers. Three rounds hit Porter in the back and one in the shoulder. Porter died at the scene.

After three days of administrative leave and a fit-for-duty psychological assessment, both troopers were back on patrol. Osborn has since been transferred to the Palmer post.

Troopers said they could not discuss Osborn's record because of privacy concerns and the ongoing investigation into whether the shooting was justified.

Some people now accusing Osborn of rough treatment have criminal records. But that doesn't give police free rein, said Joe Ray Skrha, who represents criminal defendants in Kenai.

"It's become a regular occurrence for clients to report excessive force on a regular basis by officer Osborn," Skrha said.

Officers aren't supposed to resort to force if people cooperate, said Maj. Doug Norris, deputy director of troopers. But an officer who does use force repeatedly may simply be the first to respond to gun calls, drunken fights or domestic disputes, Norris said.

If citizens have concerns about any trooper, they should bring them to troopers' attention, Norris said.

"I don't want to have a trooper that is abusing people or demeaning people or that makes people feel bad the way they talk to them," Norris said. "We don't tolerate that."



Wow, that must have been one tough gimp.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 2:10:54 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 2:39:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2009 2:39:39 PM EDT by karma]
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 2:44:51 PM EDT
In on 1 for the post count!
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 2:57:03 PM EDT
There is so much more to this. Porters parents may miss him, no one else will.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 3:08:23 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Rabon:
There is so much more to this. Porters parents may miss him, no one else will.


This.

Well, my guess is that his children will miss him.

That said, the guy still did not deserve to be executed by a trigger-happy Trooper.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 3:25:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By Rabon:
There is so much more to this. Porters parents may miss him, no one else will.


This.

Well, my guess is that his children will miss him.

That said, the guy still did not deserve to be executed by a trigger-happy Trooper.

The article makes it appear as if it happened to be Porter when they approached the suspicious vehicle, such is not the case they were looking for Porter and would have been foolish to approach him without being prepared for trouble.

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 3:29:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 3:33:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
So the trooper thought he was defending the other trooper who he thought was about to be run over by a drunk driver?

I predict a not guilty verdict.

Please keep us up dated.


I'm predicting, now that it is in the courts and cannot be derailed by the AST Union, will end up in a conviction for the Trooper.

Your knee-jerk defense of Osborn is, well, predictable. There is no way this is a good shoot. And there's no way a jury will find a good cause for a Trooper to pepper-spray a handicapped man who cannot easily get out of his car, then shoot him five times when he tries to flee.

I'll enjoy posting an update when he is convicted, when he is sentenced and when he is first sent to the prison infirmary for being beaten to a pulp after being ass-raped.



Defense?

Just pointing out what's in the article.

Oh and this is civil not a criminal trial there is no prison.


Yeah, I coughed up the mea culpa on the civil v. criminal earlier in the thread.

This does not mean that, should the civil case be won, that a criminal investigation and trial cannot be held to try Osborn for killing Porter.

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 3:59:02 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 4:00:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Excerpt of confrontation between trooper Jesse Osborn and Casey Porter in January 2003

SNIP


Good shoot.


Wrong again, Bamster.

What is with cops that think "shoot first and ask questions later" is the best policy?

Link Posted: 12/30/2009 4:05:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 4:09:11 PM EDT
Did you miss the part where the dead guy threw the car in reverse, almost hit the other trooper, and hit the trooper's car?

I know, those are minor acts. If the troopers would have hugged the guy instead, it would be all better.

So, what were the tox results?
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 6:20:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RDP:
Did you miss the part where the dead guy threw the car in reverse, almost hit the other trooper, and hit the trooper's car?

I know, those are minor acts. If the troopers would have hugged the guy instead, it would be all better.

So, what were the tox results?


Yeah, I read the transcripts.

I'm sure the Troopers were in mortal danger for their lives having the car put in gear. Hit the Trooper car. Punishable by death? Hardly. And this was a pathetic act by both Troopers.

Hugging the guy? Not quite. Don't be a LEO dick, okay?

Tox results not published.

This was a bad situation and a bad shoot. If it weren't this would not have gone as far as it did.

Again, here's to the civil suit succeeding, and a criminal suit being opened as a result of the civil. A bad cop is no better than a bad perp, plain and simple.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 6:48:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:
Excerpt of confrontation between trooper Jesse Osborn and Casey Porter in January 2003

Recording details exchange that led to fatal shooting

(08/07/08 07:54:14)

The exchange between Casey Porter and trooper Arthur Jesse Osborn at a pullout off the Sterling Highway turned deadly in less than a minute. Here is an excerpt from a transcript of the tape recording Osborn made of the encounter. The recorded dialogue began about 20 seconds after Porter began to drive away. Trooper Joe Whittom was standing just outside of his patrol car nearby.

Osborn:Get out of the car, now! Get out of the car.

Porter:What's wrong, sir?

Whittom: (Indiscernible)

Osborn:Get out of the car.

Whittom: Throw up your hands, get in your veh- get out of your vehicle!

Porter:OK. No, no problem. I'll back up.

Osborn:No, you won't back up, you will get out of the car now.

Whittom: No! Get out, now!

Osborn:Do you understand me?

Whittom: (Indiscernible)

Porter: Yes, sir.

Osborn:You will get out of that car - show me your hands! Open the door, close, now!

Whittom: (To troopers dispatch) Soldotna, 1-E-20 (his trooper ID code), we got him stopped.

Osborn:(To Whittom) Get that Taser out. (To Porter) Open the door now.

Whittom: Turn off your vehicle!

Porter: What's wrong, sir? I was just parked.

Osborn:OK, open the door now.

(Two seconds later, there's the sound of pepper spray.)

Porter: Ahhh. I didn't do nothing! nuffin


Osborn:Tell him he's been sprayed. Get out!

(Five shots fired.)

Osborn: Shots, shots fired. Soldotna, 1-E-16 (his trooper ID code), shots fired. We're 10-60 (OK). Get medics 10-19 (to the scene). You OK, Whittom?

Whittom: Yeah.

Osborn:He was headed straight for you.

Whittom: (To dispatch) Soldotna, 1-E-20 ...

Osborn:10-4, suspect. (Pause) It's the Kenai Keys pullout. I can see his hands. I believe he's 79 (dead). I can't see his, I can see his right hand. Are you OK, did your car hit you?

Whittom: No, he hit my car.

(Pause)

Osborn:God, I thought he was gonna kill you. He doesn't–– he's not wearing any pants.

Whittom: Yeah.

Osborn:Looks like there's a marijuana pipe in the front. OK. It doesn't look like he has any weapons, let's get him out of there. I couldn't open the door, I tried. (Pause) OK, I'm gonna holster my weapon, keep him covered. (Pause) You sure you're OK?

Whittom: Yeah, I'm OK. It's ...

Osborn:God, I saw him hit that car.

Whittom: (Indiscernible) the vehicle bumped me a little bit and kinda ...

Osborn:I saw him hit the gas and he was headed straight for you aiming with his steering wheel. (Pause) I'm gonna check pulse. I'm gonna handcuff him first, he was still clenching his fists a second ago. (Pause) All-right, that glove's not working.

(Radio traffic in background)

Osborn:Just cover him. He's still moving, I think that's just a reaction however. I'm gonna get in the passenger's side, cuff him. (Pause) It's locked. I'm gonna break it out with my baton. (Sound of baton breaking passenger side front window) 10-4, we're 10-60 (OK), I believe the subject's 10-79 (dead). (Pause) 10-4 and we are 10-60. Just cover him from the rear. (Pause; sound of radio traffic in background) OK. Time is 0216. Suspect isn't wearing any pants. No me- no vehicles have been moved since point of impact when Trooper Whittom's vehicle was struck. Trooper Whittom was on the other side of his vehicle, the side that had moved towards, instruct the suspect to stop and not move his vehicle. He immediately hit the gas, grasping the steering wheel with both hands, aiming for Trooper Whittom with his headlights on. I fired on the suspect. He's believed to be deceased at this point. He's been restrained. We don't see any weapons right in the vehicle immediately. Looks like some pornographic material. Suspect's not wearing any shoes. Looks like he's got a cane. I, I believe I know who this is. He was a suspect. I, I believe he's 10-99 (wanted). I'm gonna make a phone call, be off record.


fixed
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 7:26:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:

Again, here's to the civil suit succeeding, and a criminal suit being opened as a result of the civil.


Hasn't the DA already ruled it a legal shoot? AFAIK, a civil court win for Porter's family can't bootstrap a criminal case (that's already been ruled legal).

Brian
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 7:35:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By brian4wd:
Originally Posted By joe-bananas:

Again, here's to the civil suit succeeding, and a criminal suit being opened as a result of the civil.


Hasn't the DA already ruled it a legal shoot? AFAIK, a civil court win for Porter's family can't bootstrap a criminal case (that's already been ruled legal).

Brian


It was all handled behind closed doors within the Alaska State Troopers. Look at the newspaper clipping earlier in this thread.
Link Posted: 12/30/2009 7:46:38 PM EDT
No, the Da did not rule it a legal shoot. The AK highway patrol investigated the shoot inhouse, sealed the findings and then told the
DA the shooting was justified. The DA for whatever reason accepted their statements as truth and did nothing.

As for the claim " he tried to run over an trooper". We only have the trooper who fired the gun's opinion that the deceased
had that as his goal. The other trooper stated he could not understand why the first trooper fired.

Given the violent abusive history of the trigger puller this will almost certainly go into history as a murder commited
under color of authority. The shield of the thiin blue line will do anything and everything to protect this psycho with a
badge. Why...because he has a badge. That's all the reason they need, want or care to hear.

Till this mentality is dealt with police criminality will never go away, will fester and grow and eventually result in further
deaths of innocent people.

And when a court makes a ruling that in any way limits the power of LEO to abuse the public we get the usual suspects
here calling the courts and judges nasty names. And when the judges rule in ways that LEO like and citiznes don't like
they get the full faith and backing of these same quislings.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top