On Tuesday, October 5th, Phoenix police officers Richard Chrisman and Sergio Virgillo responded to a domestic disturbance call made by Elvira Fernandez. Ms. Fernandez was concerned that her son, Danny Frank Rodriguez, was throwing things against the wall and might hurt her. She left her home and went to a neighbor’s home to call the police, in hopes they would reason with him and deescalate the situation. She hoped they would teach him some “respect” and if that failed, at least get him to leave her home.
Ms. Fernandez would learn a very hard lesson about calling the police to resolve family disputes that day (if you don’t already know, DON’T DO IT! Chances are, it’ll only make things worse, and certainly more violent). Instead of teaching her son the lesson she hoped for, 15 minutes after police arrived, her son (and the family dog) would lay dead on the floor of her mobile home. In the aftermath of this tragic shooting, Officer Vergillo, would be instrumental in his partner Chrisman’s arrest for what transpired in the trailer that afternoon.
Less than an hour after the shooting, Officer Chrisman was arrested and charged with aggravated assault, though officials acknowledge the severity of the incident warrants more severe charges being filed. His partner’s allegations, outlined in an extensive police report, describe Chrisman as a loose cannon, like Mel Gibson’s Lethal Weapon character, immediately after initiating contact with the victim drawing his gun, holding it to Rodriguez’s head and shouting “I don’t need no warrant, motherfucker.”
Vergillo describes that afternoon as “the worst day of [his] life,” surely an understatement as far as the family of Danny Rodriguez is concerned. However, it goes to show just how egregious Chrisman’s behavior must have been. In his sworn statement, Vergillo states emphatically that there was never a threat to either officer that would justify deadly force, and that Rodriguez never displayed a weapon. He also asserted that the dog that Chrisman executed barked, but had never “attacked” them, and that Rodriguez was understandably upset when his dog was killed, so he tried to talk him down and de-escalate the situation. When Chrisman went “hands on” with Rodriguez, Vergillo attempted to assist him, going so far as to deploy his own Taser, after Chrisman had failed to subdue Rodriguez with his own. In a display of valiant defiance, Rodriguez removed the Taser probes and stood up, whereupon Chrisman shot him in the face with “OC” (pepper) spray. Finally, Rodriguez informed the officers of his intent to leave, grabbing his bicycle that had been leaning against the kitchen counter. Vergillo stood behind Chrisman as Rodriguez attempted to exit the trailer, both hands on the handlebars of his bike, stepping toward the door. Chrisman grasped the handlebars from the other side, and a physical struggle for control of the bike ensued, and finally, with his partner only a few feet away, Chrisman stepped back from the bicycle, drew his weapon, and fired repeatedly into Rodriguez’s chest, killing him almost instantly.
It was after this climactic end to what should have been a routine domestic disturbance call that Chrisman simply left the building, while his partner was left to tend to the victim. Vergillo immediately radioed in a “998,” the PPD code for an officer involved shooting and requested an ambulance, but that was to no avail. Soon after that, detectives arrived, and on the basis of Vergillo’s statement, Chrisman was arrested on the scene.
This horrific situation raises a number of questions. Obviously, if true, the allegations against Chrisman are an extremely egregious case of police brutality, excessive force, and abuse of authority. But, in addition, one must ask, what about Officer Vergillo? Why did he stand by while all this went down, in the course of what he knew was likely an unjustified entry, especially after the assault with a deadly weapon (Chrisman placing his gun against Rodriguez’s temple) committed by his partner? Why did it take witnessing a willful act of murder to bring out this officer’s sense of duty to protect the community from acts of violent criminality?
The Police Union has come out in support of Officer Chrisman, helping him post a $150,000 bond, despite him being accused of gross violations of civil rights, professional standards of behavior, and the most basic moral tenets of any human society, and not by a mere mundane, but by a fellow officer. It is telling that Chrisman is a member of PLEA (an ironic name, under the circumstances) the Phoenix police officers union, while Vergillo is not.
Examining the record on these two officers is very enlightening. Chrisman is on the Brady list, a national database available to prosecutors of officers whose credibility as witnesses have been thoroughly compromised, due to documented instances of official dishonesty. Of course, the specifics of the 2007 incident that landed him there are kept secret from the public, but the significance of this fact is obvious. That the state itself does not trust this man to proffer honest testimony in open court speaks volumes about his integrity, especially given the well known proclivity the boys in blue have for “creative” testimony on behalf of their government handlers. If a DA wont have him, whatever it was, it must have been BAD. In addition, he has built extensive files with personnel and internal affairs in his 9-year tenure with the force.
On the other hand, Vergillo is a 14-year PPD veteran, and while he’s not on the Brady list, and hasn’t had any previous public allegations of excessive force, it is alleged he was demoted from the Drug Enforcement Bureau on account of his wife’s criminal involvement with the cartels. Nonetheless, by comparison, he looks far more reliable and credible than his partner.
Which brings me to the crux of this conflict for the powers that be. While racial tensions and the political climate cannot be overlooked, what with Joe Arpaio’s war on brown folks, the recent payout of a large settlement by the neighboring City of Mesa for a police shooting that ended the life of a 15 year old Hispanic boy, the embarrassing arrest of African American city councilman and former police officer Michael Johnson, and statewide minority outrage against SB1070, which Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon has publicly come out against, what is more interesting to me is the clash of cultures within the police community. Both accuser and accused are police officers. The union is firmly behind Officer Chrisman, whom they represent, but have so far refrained from openly criticizing his partner (the same cannot be said for Chrisman’s attorney, who is being paid for by PLEA). Meanwhile, Officer Vergillo and members of his family have already made statements to the press, and the Chief of the Phoenix Police Department has held a press conference that was unusual in it’s candor, wherein he seemed genuinely interested in seeing some kind of justice done, and highly critical of Chrisman’s behavior. He even went as far as thanking Vergillo for “telling the truth” about the matter, suggesting he believes the allegations to be accurate. However, the attitude of rank and file officers is not so supportive, and online comments identifying themselves as police personnel or their families have already referred to Vergillo as “the rat in the station” and suggested that he’s motivated by racial solidarity with the victim, despite the fact that he’s Italian, and not Hispanic.
In spite of the chief’s laudatory speeches and assurances to concerned community leaders that he’ll be protected from professional reprisal, I can tell you what is likely to happen to Officer Vergillo for speaking up. The same thing that happened to countless others who dared cross that “Thin Blue Line” in order to keep their “Brother Officers” honest, and to police their own. He’ll be frozen out, his performance reviews will suddenly become universally negative, he’ll get the worst shifts, in the worst neighborhoods, and he’ll get partnered with all the misfit rookies. They’ll harass him, threaten him and otherwise treat him like a pariah until he quits, or retires, or transfers elsewhere. In the worst case, he’ll be set up for a crime or even murdered (it has happened before). Within most police forces, officers value group loyalty over individual honesty, and betrayal of that loyalty is the one crime they will not look the other way on or cover up for another officer.
I’ll be following this story as it develops, and I’ll bring you updates as they become available. Should be very interesting to watch this play out. I can only hope that the resolution brings some level of justice to Elvira Fernandez, though I doubt it will do much to assuage the guilt she feels for calling the police that fateful day.
Dear Copblock,
I have been following your posts for some time and often find them well thought out and only mildly biased. Your heavy view of Elvira Fernandez’s choice to call the police that day is a more than a little over the top. This is the express purpose of the police force, is to protect citizens from other citizens. I support you 100% in your cause to hold officer’s accountable for their actions both on and off duty and to protect our rights to video tape our interactions with officers of the law. As a film student in Chicago I often faced unlawful harassment from police officers for merely having a video camera on me, even though it was turned off.
However, your opinion that Mrs. Fernandez should feel guilty for calling the cops is absurd. She did what any citizen should have. Could she have expected this horrific an outcome? No. I grew up with most of my friends coming from broken homes and saw the police called more than once, and not just to white, middle-class houses. They were nothing but helpful, and did their best to diffuse the situation as they should.
While this is your site, and I cannot tell you how to run it or what you should believe, in my eyes it has hurt your credibility to insult a mother who has last her child to a sociopath while following the law and calling the police to protect her self in a physical dispute. You yourselves push the “Man’s” buttons while always claiming (correctly) to be acting within your rights and within the bounds of the law. This woman was acting within her rights and well within the bounds of the law to protect herself and her property and something far worse than a week in jail happened to her. You are fantastic at exposing the corruption within the boys in blue, but please don’t vilify a victim just to take a stab at the establishment.
Sincerely,
Jacob Zeckel
Jacob: I do not see anywhere in this article where the author vilified or insult Ms. Fernandez. His statement that you should not call the police was made because over and over we see that calling the police can be hazardous to yourself and your family. This statement is a warning to others not an indictment of Ms. Fernandez. She is not responsible for her sons death. Only his murderers are responsible. No one here has said any different.
I don’t think she SHOULD feel guilty, I just know that she WILL feel guilty. It isn’t her fault, and I never said it was, but I have seen first hand what it is like when a parent loses a child. She will always blame herself, and she shouldn’t have to. What I DO suggest is, knowing full well that incidents like this happen all the time, others ought to think very carefully about the risk they are taking in calling the police to the scene of a family dispute. The ONLY tool the police have is aggression. Once they show up, someone is usually going to go to jail. Is that REALLY going to solve your problems? Is it REALLY going to improve the situation? I’m sure Elvira was very upset about the fight, and all the plates Danny broke. She called the cops in hopes of making him stop, de-escalating the situation, and maybe having him cool his heels in the squad car or county jail, thus backing her parental authority with that of the state, and teaching him a lesson in the process. It didn’t work out that way, and in retrospect, I’m sure she’d gladly burn her trailer down to the ground if it would bring Danny back. So, again, THINK TWICE, and maybe even THRICE before you call the cops.
While I understand your concern, I think you are being much too hard on Officer Vergillo. He is the type of cop we all yearn for. He could’ve covered for his partner, and despite the outrage, they both would’ve gotten away with it. Instead he reported the truth and finally removed a horrible cop. And now he is being vilified by the disgusting union (which is doubly disgusting).
Could he have done more? Sure, maybe by removing the other officer. But I can understand in that situation not wanting to interfere with your partner. I’m certain he didnt expect the shooting. And once that started, it was was too late to react.
So please, treat this guy like a hero. He could of c
I’m just reporting what my Google-fu turned up. Vergillo may well be a hero, and an honest cop. I can’t yet independently verify the allegations about his demotion, but I already said that he clearly seems far more credible and reliable than his partner Chrisman, a proven liar whose testimony cannot be trusted in court. I too imagine that he was hoping at each escalation that Chrisman would not possibly get any worse, and was probably shocked by the shooting, but that speaks to my point. I think he was ready to cover for his partner UNTIL the shooting happened. So all that egregious misconduct up until the shooting, including executing the dog, was basically acceptable, something to deal with after the fact, if at all. That culture of ass covering is the real problem, and it’s why this story would likely NEVER have been a story if Chrisman hadn’t killed someone.
“Executed” the dog? I think “murdered” is a more accurate word in this case.
911 is a sledge hammer. if you need a sledge hammer, it might work well for you. a lot of people call 911 when they really just need a tack or trim nailer. they’re always stunned when there world gets busted up.
I’ve been on over 15,000 911 calls as a medic- I’ve seen cops write citations to people for having 3 dogs (small, well-behaved, no complaints from neighbors, etc) when city statute only allows for 2. The family called 911 because the guy was having a heart attack. I can’t tell you how many domestic calls I’ve been on- many times the cops spend more time looking for (and many times, finding) roaches in the ashtrays, minors drinking, code violations, etc.
I’ve also seen a few heroic cops in my time- guys who really are trying to do the right thing. Until we cut the federal grants (drugs, seat belts, alcohol, DARE, etc) and homeland security funding, the bureaucratic/petty cops are going to outnumber the good ones by a long shot. The argument to privatize police departments (and fire departments) is very valid.
I always tell people to be careful when you call 911- you are opening your entire world to scrutiny and introducing more chaos into the mix… it can be a fantastic life or death tool, but I wouldn’t call for anything less.
Hi Jacob,
Thank you for your thoughtful response. As Paula pointed out, I don’t think Dylan meant that Ms. Rodriguez should feel guilty. He merely used her experience as an example of why calling 911 can be very, very dangerous and render unexpected and unnecessarily violent outcomes. I think this is an important point to make because most people in society assume that calling 911 is always beneficial. As Dylan and Marty point out, it’s best to be informed as to just what one is getting into when calling 911. There are a slew of other considerations and hazards at stake, and an individual should be informed of these before calling 911, and assuming that help, rather than disaster, will come.
I don’t consider this so much bias as it is a unique perspective. The perspective of “be careful when calling 911; it could be VERY dangerous” is one not commonly found in the mainstream media (or at all), yet I believe it is an important one.
You had me until you mentioned “Joe Arpaio’s war on brown folks”, then I stopped.
Well, then, GSW, you’re ignorant of the facts on the ground in Phoenix. I live here in Arizona, so I see what goes on, and I think my characterization of the MCSD as “at war” with Hispanics is accurate. They do these “crime sweeps,” where they block off whole city blocks in Hispanic neighborhoods, the park, or the swap meet, and they hassle everyone for their papers, they run warrant checks, they ticket for every possible offense as a pretext to find “illegals.” YouTube it, plenty of these events have been recorded. Meanwhile, they lie about their clearance rate of genuine crimes (you know, the kind with victims) to cover for their inattentiveness to their actual duties. See here:
http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/article/2785
Sheriff Joe and his pal Sheriff Babeu are both known associates of white supremacists like JT Ready and the guys at Political Cess Pool radio, where mini-Joe (that’s Babeu) appeared recently to proclaim his commitment to ignoring real threats to the lives and property of his constituents so he can play “La MIgra” out in the desert.
If you support these guys, you just don’t have a clue how bad it is out here for Hispanics, in a state where they make up more than 30% of the actual citizenship. Sheriff Joe Arpaio is a racist cop who is leaving Maricopa County at the mercy of dangerous felons so he can pursue his anti-Mexican agenda. See here:
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/article_6c9d2128-bbdc-5262-b9b6-acc53d053adb.html
There’s more and more and more evidence to this affect, and that’s why the FBI and the DoJ are investigating his crooked fiefdom. But this comment thread isn’t the venue for that discussion. He’s only relevant as one contextual factor contributing to the overall climate of racial tension in Phoenix, and that’s why he was mentioned.
I spent 6 years on patrol in So Cal. I was lucky enough to never work with an officer as egregious as Chrisman. One of the several reasons I left LE was the “we’re above the law” attitude that was so prevalent. We ere supposed to serve the people of the community, not lord over them.
In 6 years I never told a lie nor lied in a report to cover an officer’s backside. Good cops liked me; bad cops distrusted me. That’s life.
Every good cops in that division needs to step forward and tell the captain that they want to work with officer Vergillo. That is the best way for honest cops to show their respect and support for another honest cop.
Is that you, OJ (no, not Simpson)? If so, nice to run into you once again on the intarwebz. If not, welcome to Cop Block, and thanks for your comments. I truly hope that what you suggest is indeed what happens. So far, it looks like that isn’t happening. I’ll certainly let you know what does happen, as soon as I find out, no matter what.
Marty,
Great comment. You’ve got it spot on. These federal grants are basically make work projects for creating a police state. Democrats and Republicans are equally responsible – the former for their dependence on government unions, and the latter to pander to bogus law and order constituents.
“Why did it take witnessing a willful act of murder to bring out this officer’s *sense of duty* to protect the community from acts of violent criminality?” [emphasis mine]
Vergillo’s sense of duty to his co-worker Chrisman, trumped his sense of morality until he became a witness to Chrisman murdering Rodriguez, and possibly an accessory to that murder. Only then did his stunted morality exert its feeble self. Or maybe it was just his sense of self-preservation.
The vast majority of laws ceased to reflect right and wrong a very long time ago. What passes for law is mostly other peoples’ preferences inflicted upon their neighbors, with cops enforcing those preferences and using duty as an excuse. I’m sure no one here needs to be reminded that German soldiers loading people onto cattle cars were merely executing their murderous *duty.*
Cops’ “duty” mantra is a threadbare excuse for far too many wrongful actions. Please don’t lend that excuse any legitimacy by conflating duty with morality.
I understand your point. I guess I was referring to the moral duty I imagine they should feel. It is a duty they offer a great deal of lip service to, as well. Whenever they make a lot of noise about putting their lives on the line, that’s what they point to. Of course, I know, and so do you I’m sure, that the Supreme Court has confirmed time and again that no such duty actually exists.
Matt-
I understand what you’re saying, but… ‘Vergillo’s sense of duty to his co-worker Chrisman, trumped his sense of morality until he became a witness to Chrisman murdering Rodriguez, and possibly an accessory to that murder. Only then did his stunted morality exert its feeble self. Or maybe it was just his sense of self-preservation.’
In reality, cops back each other because they know there could be a time they need someone to back them. Lots of quick decisions are being made and many times they’re not the best. I don’t think this is a central govt putting the screws to the people (nazis…), but I think it’s a system giving the wrong incentives. The federal grants and drug laws encourage these intrusions. Instead of being part of an evil plan, I believe this is an unintended consequence.
Elinor Ostrom’s ground-breaking studies of police departments demonstrates clearly that the less central control, the better. But, people want big departments under the false assumption that they’re more efficient.
I would love to see departments privatized. I don’t think that’s going to happen. I do believe we can reduce federal inpact, though.
For Matt B to call Vergillo a “hero” is REALLY over the top. At one time, the word “hero” would be limited in its application to people who acted in an extremely rare and brave way to go well beyond the norms of human behavior to accomplish a goal selflessly. Has the social fabric within this country become so debased that merely telling the truth about a thug while being paid by the taxpayer by force rises to the level of heroic? I have serious doubts. It was the RIGHT thing to do, but not heroic. This kind of “grade inflation” when it comes to praising people in costumes has gone way too far. Let’s keep it real. Vergillo was on the payroll when he simply related events as they occurred. Nothing more, nothing less. Perhaps it would have been genuinely heroic if he has prevented his fellow officer from performing a criminal act in front of his face.
This is typical of the new Police force. They hire the most gung ho I am God lunatics who should never have been given a badge. Any Police Officer who says anything against the Officer who turned the other one in should be fired on the spot but it will never happen. Most of the Police are corrupt. There are a few good ones left but very few. This cop should be charged with murder and sent to prison. It may have happened so fast that Vergillo may not have been in a position to stop it.
Hey Marty,
You’re missing the point.
But first:
“cops back each other because they know there could be a time they need someone to back them.”
How’s that any different from what I wrote about Vergillo’s sense of duty to his co-worker trumping his sense of morality?
And now:
“I don’t think this is a central govt putting the screws to the people (nazis…), but I think it’s a system giving the wrong incentives. The federal grants and drug laws encourage these intrusions. Instead of being part of an evil plan, I believe this is an unintended consequence.”
It doesn’t make any difference at whom the perpetrators point when they whine, “I was following orders!” A person’s job *cannot ever* remove their primary duty: discerning right from wrong and acting accordingly.
Evil plan or unintended consequence makes not one whit of difference to the victims. The same duty-shirking, unthinking, responsibility-passing, bipedal rottweilers tore them pieces, all the while shrieking, “I was told to do it!”
*That’s* the vast, vast, vast majority of cops’ version of “duty.”
Billy links a news video featuring Chrisman’s “duty” shaman:
http://www.two–four.net/weblog.php?id=P5028
http://www.azfamily.com/video/?sec=528732&id=105005254
I don’t know if this is what Matt was attempting to ultimately point to, but here is a blurb about surveillance video showing Officer Chrisman planting a crack pipe on a homeless woman a few years ago. This is one of the incidents that contributed to him being branded as a problem officer by his own department, I guess. (Because he was caught? I wonder?) And you moderates in the crowd reading that and rolling your eyes, instantly assuming I’m just a police hater – no. I’ve never been arrested, I have no misdemeanor or felony charges or convictions. Well, aside from minor traffic stuff, and none of THAT in the past ten years. What I *am* is a citizen who is !@#$!@# tired of seeing stories about police beating and killing other citizens outside the scope of their reasonable duties (bad faith) or stealing from people (think of a cop claiming someone’s camera is ‘evidence’ and then taking it without a warrant or subpoena) and GETTING AWAY WITH IT. Why are *you* outraged?
http://www.azfamily.com/video/?sec=528732&id=105005254
Here is a link to why Chrisman ended up on the Brady list. He planted drugs on a cuffed suspect as a “joke.” Though he did tell investigators that he never intended to charge the suspect with drug possession, he just thought it would be funny. By the way, he knew the suspect has a mental handicap. Real funny there big guy.
This entry is the first I’ve read at this blog – first link I’ve seen to it – and I am pleased with the caliber of writing, both by the article writer and the commenters on a subject that on many other venues contains initially, and deteriorates in comments quickly to, harangues or rants. I’m also a longtime resident of central AZ, though in rural Pinal county just south of the Gila River Indian Reservation, so I’m fairly well aware of the atmosphere in various parts of the greater Phoenix area.
Following up on the comment by Molon Labe:
“Every good cops in that division needs to step forward and tell the captain that they want to work with officer Vergillo. That is the best way for honest cops to show their respect and support for another honest cop.”
What he is promoting here is a selective type of positive social preferencing – requesting to work with an individual who demonstrates characteristics admired by the requester. This is also the way characteristics/behavior that are admired and desired by individuals are promoted, encouraged and will actually increase in prevalence. Such requests to work with Sergio Virgillo by associates will demonstrate to the Phoenix police administration that this officer’s actions (in regard to his reports on Richard Chrisman’s actions) were not condemned by those doing the requesting.
As for Richard Chrisman, negative social preferencing – withdrawal of voluntary association – is the appropriate action of every individual who assesses his behavior to be unacceptable, beyond what the current legal system does with him. This means having nothing to do with him, voluntarily – clerks in stores are nothing more than civil, those who recognize him avoid talking to or even being in proximity to him. It is then clear that he is considered and treated as “persona non grata” by everyone, except of course those who think as he did/does and would do the same; and they too in turn can be socially preferenced against.
This selective (discriminating) association to exclude those who cause harm – and also toward those who support such harm-causing – is a potentially very powerful method of non-violent action, referred to as ostracism and shunning by many down through the ages. It is included in Gene Sharp’s 2nd volume (of 3), “The Politics of Nonviolent Action”, Chapter 4, “The Methods of Social Noncooperation”. I and husband Paul Wakfer use the term “negative Social Preferencing” for purposeful non-voluntary association (contrasted with positive Social Preferencing towards those who do provide value) and have described how it is the ultimate effector of social order in a truly free society (The Freeman Society) – http://selfsip.org/solutions/Social_Preferencing.html
In order that positive and negative social preferencing can be wide spread and therefore be highly instrumental in persuading the changing of behavior, publication of current photos of the individuals involved is essential. Those wanting to support or discourage certain behaviors of individuals need to be able to recognize those parties. I am very pleased that AZCentral published a very large and clear (supposedly current) photo of Richard Chrisman. http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2010/10/06/20101006phoenix-police-officer-in-fatal-shooting-arrested06-ON.html
You can be sure that if I see him at any location I happen to be at in Phoenix (or anywhere), I will make it clear by my (non-violent) actions that I do *not* approve of nor even tolerate/accept his actions. This might include negative facial expressions and even verbal comments (intended to be overheard by others) such as: “There is Richard Chrisman, that cop who killed a non-threatening dog and then the 15 year old owner when he tried to leave the area – all after the boy’s mom innocently called 911 for some assistance in defusing a family dispute.”
I encourage others to do similarly with regards to Richard Chrisman and others who cause physical harm, especially when they are cops or other types of government enforcers since these individuals are the key to the State. The politicians and bureaucrats – rulers – do not get out into the field and enforce their own legislation/decrees/mandates/etc. Instead they depend on the enforcers to do the dirty work. Therefore the enforcers are the key! Politicians and bureaucrats simply talk and write, even when it is to give orders.
Correction to part of my previous post due to my misinterpretation of the victim’s age:
This might include negative facial expressions and even verbal comments (intended to be overheard by others) such as: “There is Richard Chrisman, that cop who killed a non-threatening dog and then the male owner when he tried to leave the area – all after the man’s mother innocently called 911 for some assistance in defusing a family dispute.”
The victim was 29 years old. I can correct your original comment if you like.
“…if this is what Matt was attempting to ultimately point to…”
Nope. I linked to Billy’s commentary on the chairman of Chrisman’s police officers’ union, spouting the requisite “duty” mantra.
Replacement of my original sentence, Dylboz, with the corrected one is fine with me. Then, I presume you would remove my 10/15 9:06pm message and your own referring to it. And adding an “edited” notation, for those who had read the original?
However I have no objection to simply leaving both thereby making it clear that I made and corrected an error.
Matt-
I think we’re speaking from the same side of the fence, with subtle differences…
‘How’s that any different from what I wrote about Vergillo’s sense of duty to his co-worker trumping his sense of morality?’
Vergillo has shown himself to be a decent cop. No disciplinary actions and he did step up here. There’s no way he could’ve been prepared for the explosion of violence his partner exhibited. There’s a ton of moral gray area for everyone…
‘Evil plan or unintended consequence makes not one whit of difference to the victims. The same duty-shirking, unthinking, responsibility-passing, bipedal rottweilers tore them pieces, all the while shrieking, “I was told to do it!”’
If someone’s killed by someone driving recklessly or someone running a stop sign, the victim doesn’t care. If the stop sign was poorly positioned, that can be fixed to help avoid further victims. If it’s just someone driving like an asshole- they need to be punished.
I think this tragedy is the result of the unintended consequences of a lot of laws and the militarization of the police. I don’t think it’s a conscious effort to wipe out a segment of society. We need to work to change the laws to help prevent future victims.
Hi Marty,
“I think this tragedy is the result of the unintended consequences of a lot of laws and the militarization of the police. I don’t think it’s a conscious effort to wipe out a segment of society. We need to work to change the laws to help prevent future victims.”
You’re snagged on a symptom. A person’s primary obligation is to determine right from wrong and act accordingly, laws be damned. Genocide is a symptom of the failure to perform one’s primary obligation.
If Vergillo was a decent cop, he would have drawn his gun on Chrisman the instant Chrisman put his gun to Rodriguez’s head, but something in Vergillo trumped morality long enough for Chrisman to murder Rodriguez. Vergillo’s inaction is a symptom of his failure to perform his primary obligation, just as loading a person onto a cattle car bound for a “work” camp is a symptom of one’s failure to perform one’s primary obligation.
Have you read Milton Mayer’s They Thought They Were Free? One’s primary obligation easily falls to gradual pressure without constant vigilance:
“You see,” my colleague went on, “one doesn’t see exactly where or how to
move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the
last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait
for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock
comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don’t want to act, or
even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’
Why not? – Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just
fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine
uncertainty.
“Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as
time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community,
‘everyone’ is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know,
in France or Italy there would be slogans against the government painted on
walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is
not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak
privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what
do they say? They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re
an alarmist.’
“And you *are* an alarmist. You are saying that *this* must lead to
*this*, and you can’t prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do
you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even
surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the
Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as
pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are,
naturally, people who have always thought as you have.
“But your friends are fewer now. Some have drifted off somewhere or
submerged themselves in their work. You no longer see as many as you did at
meetings or gatherings. Informal groups become smaller; attendance drops off
in little organizations, and the organizations themselves wither. Now, in
small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to
yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens
your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to – to
what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you
must *make* an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker.
So you wait, and you wait.
“But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands
will join with you, never comes. *That’s* the difficulty. If the last and
worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and
smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked – if,
let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the
‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of
course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of
little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to
be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you
did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to
Step D.
“And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of
them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy,
and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby,
saying ‘Jew swine,’ collapses it all at once, and you see that everything,
everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world
you live in – your nation, your people – is not the world you were born in at
all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the
shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the
holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the
lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live
in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even
know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. Now
you live in a system which rules without responsibility even to God. The
system itself could not have intended this in the beginning, but in order to
sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way.
“You have gone almost all the way yourself. Life is a continuing process,
a flow, not a succession of acts and events at all. It has flowed to a new
level, carrying you with it, without any effort on your part. On this new
level you live, you have been living more comfortably every day, with new
morals, new principles. You have accepted things you would not have accepted
five years ago, a year ago, things that your father, even in Germany, could
not have imagined.
“Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you
have done, or, more accurately, what you haven’t done (for that was all that
was required of most of us: that we do nothing). You remember those early
meetings of your department in the university when, if one had stood, others
would have stood, perhaps, but no one stood. A small matter, a matter of
hiring this man or that, and you hired this one rather than that. You
remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised
beyond repair.
— Milton Mayer, “They Thought They Were Free” pages 169-72
If the police knew this office was a ‘loose cannon’ then it is their responsibility that this has happened.
First I want to say that what this officer did was insane. It was wrong on so many levels and he should be charged and jailed. How many complaints must be filed before the police department takes someone off street duty ? They knew about this guy… For the cops who are blindly sticking up for him just because of some misguided “blue” wall force … shame on you… that kind of crap is hurting the integrity of the police …. You should stick up for the honest cop who told the truth. TRUTH – not “we knew he was a loose cannon, but oh well, he’s a cop and therefore our brother, so lets stick up for him”…
Finally… the fault is partly the mother who called the police …granted she probably thought of some Mayberry type visit to the jail was going to straighten her boy right out….Wake UP PEOPLE – Back to the real world …..stop using the police to raise your kids … get off your ass and teach your kids right from wrong from the start …..don’t wait till you’ve lost control and then call the police thinking you are doing what’s best….. This is a horrible outcome and I feel sorry for her… but she lost control a long time ago … waiting till the situation escalated to this point and then calling the police on him was stupid….. this kid sounds like he needed a psychologist not a cop … or maybe MOM should have had some parenting classes years ago…Sadly this mother will have the rest of her life to figure out where she went wrong… even sadder is, she will probably just go on blaming the police never realizing part of the blame is on her too …
To all;
Officer Vergillio is my cousin, he has always been a very kind man, and i think i can speak for my entire family when i say that we all stand by what he did and his sister Gina’s response to the press. He was raised by an amazing woman and he had a pretty great male figure in his life. He has been through quite a lot the past two years, his mother’s illness and passing and his wife’s problems, but again i state that he is a great guy. I am proud that he had the bravery and courage to do what was right than do what many people with a badge do, which is sell out. none of the t.v. shows show what’s real, selling out in that line of work is so much more common than doing what’s right.
what appears to be current is that this murderer has been charged with 2nd degree murder.
a plea bargain will be done behind the scene. he will plead to 3rd degree man slaughter or maybe even a class A misdemeanor.
he will serve a SHORT jail sentence, have a large fine mostly suspended, and at some point in time, be found to have been out of his mind due to PTSD, due to arduous & dangerous “Police Work”.
after this happens, he will finally have his sentence over turned, then resume being a goon-thug, murderous Police Man.
I am willing to wager a considerable amount of money behind this scenario I just described. this has happened SO many times as to no longer be a “scenario” but a very probable outcome in this disgusting event.
he will then either return to a different Police Department, or become a paid GOvernment Contractor, not only allowed, but REQUIRED to “pack heat”.
Satan has much more evil, that he expects this goon-thug thing to do.