By Davy V.
When they’re not busy executing innocent family pets, or racially profiling African-American and Latino motorists, Rochester, NY Police officers can be found shooting tenants for not paying their rent.
On Tuesday afternoon, several Rochester, NY Police officers accompanied a court marshal in the eviction of a tenant in the Cooper Union building, located at 119 State St., across from the Federal courthouse building.
The building, which houses 44 apartments, is run by the VOA, or Volunteers of America, a social services organization which offers transitional help to former homeless people.
When the man became upset at the fact that he was being thrown out of his home, Rochester, NY Police officers opened fire on the man, who had fallen on hard times.
According to Rochester, NY Police department public information officer Justin Collins, who had already begun the department’s ‘shooting justification spin’, the man was “armed.”
When asked my members of the media what kind of weapon the man was armed with, Collins refused to say, stating that because of an ongoing investigation, he could not say.
As it turns out, the man had a bottle of bleach in his hands.
The man, whose name has not been released was taken to Strong Hospital.
According to Collins, at least three RPD officers were treated for minor injuries.
Sounds like another incident where trigger-happy Rochester, NY Police officers overreacted, by using what should always be a last resort, deadly force, which could have very well resulted in a man’s death.
Disgustingly, Rebecca Jaffarian, a spokeswoman for the VOA, said, “Unfortunately we don’t know what’s going to set a client off in that regard, let’s hope those officers who were injured are going to be safe.”
Really?
What about your tenant?
Who could have been killed by trigger-happy, gun ho Rochester, NY Police officers?
I guess we know how Ms. Jaffarian feels about the VOA’s tenants.
This is at least the second time this month that the Rochester, NY Police department has shown just how trigger-happy their officers are.
Officers with itchy trigger fingers, who quite frankly can’t wait to unload lead on innocent victims.
On January 8th, Rochester, NY Police officer Chris Burgstrom executed Codi, an innocent, scared, lost and injured family dog.
After hitting Codi with his police cruiser, Burgstrom then chased the injured dog through Charlotte Lake Ontario Park, before grabbing his shotgun and shooting the cowering Codi in the back of his head.
With the power of the Internet, I have taken Codi’s story international, having just recently finished two interviews in the UK.
I have also launched the “LAW ENFORCEMENT STOP EXECUTING OUR INNOCENT FAMILY PETS!” Movement, bringing attention to what is becoming an increasing issue of police officers executing innocent family pets, not just here in Rochester, but throughout the U.S.
I will be updating this story.
Scene of shooting
Follow me on twitter https://twitter.com/davyvara
- Scene of shootingAccording to Collins, at least three RPD officers were treated for minor injuries.
I always thought housework was a crime.
ha ha ha…nice one rick\
and just for fun, courts have ruled in the past that ‘bleach’ or any other caustic agent can be considered a ‘weapon’ and even a ‘chemical agent/weapon’ and additionally, bleach has been recently used to attack others.
…once, again, another completely justified shooting. I hope the 4 officers who were doused in bleach recover quickly and return back to to work.
Hey Davy, how’d that necropsy come out?
After reading this story and reading Codi’s story, I find that I am becoming even more disgusted with boot licking sycophantic cop apologists and more disinclined to place any amount of trust in any law enforcement officer.
Davy V: I know you are just a “blogger / journalist”….but can you at least try and have any kind ofprofessioanlism? You know NOTHING about what happened. Looks preety obvious from even your own little story that this guy is pretty volatile. His decisions….not paying his rent (this I kind of where the grand idea of “volutaryism” breaks down…what do yo do when people don’t uphold their end of their end of the contract??), and then turning to violence….where what?? Couldn’t hear ya? Oh right…HIS DECESION.
So now, let’s recap Davy’s ournalism for those that came in late: (this just from memory without going back to do any research…so there could be many more)
* well, there is this story where he misses.
* there was his referenced shooting of the maurading pit bull that chased several people…attempting to maul them.
* there was his video of a knocking on the door by someone that we can’t identify
* other was the picture of the officers posing / acting silly.
Wow…I guess he has found the smoking gun after all. Not.
I like how the author insinuates that the man was shot simply for not paying his rent.
Excellent reporting.
@UO
He’s not a ‘reporter’ nor a ‘journalist’ – they tend to have ethics. Davy V tends to be a spin jockey with his tin cup out, asking for someone to give him money since being an ‘activist’ doesn’t really pay all that well.
More information was released about 1.5 hours ago. You will notice davy has not updated his article. Probably because the updated info does not line up with his desire to run down the police every chance he gets. HAY DAVY! YOU GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE STABBING ON ST PAUL OR THE MURDER ON BARTLET ST? NO? WHY THE F NOT?
Like others have said, horrible reporting. Nothing in this is fact, and even if it is, it’s impossible to take the author seriously. The spin factor on this article is ridiculous.
ok lets talk ethics This is an ethics test question brought to you by the court of public opinion, One fine day 56 year old emma lou decided to visit the downtown shopping district in her community. After a lovely morning of shopping she was exiting the last store thinking about lunch at her favorite deli just up the street, as she steps onto the sidewalk she is slammed into by a brawling crowd of people once she regains her balance she tries to escape the melee suddenly she is shoved into the store window and she hears someone screaming “lets see some id NOW” confused and frightened she tries to comply by shakily reaching into her bag for her wallet, oops officer friendly sees this as a threat and opens fire instantly no stop or i’ll shoot just fires off 5 shots 1 in her head 2 in her chest and 2 thru the store window 1 of which went thru the head of a 2 year old little girl in her mothers arms killing her instantly. QUESTION Was officer friendly right, and why?
its clear that courtofpublicopinion is an idiot.
interesting, response is a personal attack against author,do all cops turn into dickless wonders when faced with a tough question they are unable to answer? or are they just a bunch of dripping pussies to begin with? courtofpublicopinion will await more data prior to judging.
Give us ALL the facts. You present just those facts designed to get only the response you want. If this really happened, link us to the case.
Once again, its only emotion they focus on, not fact.
it is a TEST question designed to gauge the current trends in THINKING,but of course you cops are above answering questions from a common citizen and as for thinking not much of that seems to go on in your line of work, just instant knee-jerk reactions hmmm, now i see
But its a question that is clearly biased in its structure. Anyone can create a loaded question, one that only has the answer that they are looking for. So if you want to have a discussion, do that. Asking a question like you did isn’t proof of anything. It has nothing to do with “current trends in thinking”. It is only your thought.
Once again to t, common, and all the other bootlickers, why were tasers not used before guns? I suppose if I’m holding my phone charger, or have a belt on, I can be shot for having an object that I could potentially garrote them with? By your logic, yes.
The reason these officers used deadly force is because there is no requirement for them to use tasers instead. They probably relished the thought of using their nice new pistols on man too poor to afford his rent, much less a lawyer. They know they’ll be protected by their fellow bootlickers and it would take a lawsuit from a lawyer to cost them so much as an hours pay. So why not kill a man that was “armed”?
If people can do something, they will. Countless criminals admit to committing crimes because they can.
I dare a bootlicker to refute my logic. I doubt you can, as you couldn’t get into a four year college that actually pays.