Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
SF Police Commission hearing 9-21-05 on Camerin Boyd's case
Wednesday, September 21, 2005, please join us at the
Police Commission and hear the OCC charges brought against Officers
O'Malley, Sweeney, Paine, and Dimaposoc, who killed or tried to kill
Cammerin Boyd. We will hold a press conference on the steps of City Hall
at 5:00 p.m. just before the hearing.
Police Commission and hear the OCC charges brought against Officers
O'Malley, Sweeney, Paine, and Dimaposoc, who killed or tried to kill
Cammerin Boyd. We will hold a press conference on the steps of City Hall
at 5:00 p.m. just before the hearing.
(From Marylon Boyd, mother of Cammerin Boyd, disabled Black youth murdered by SFPD on 5-5-04)
THE first hearing on the OCC charges in the Cammerin Boyd case was
continued again.
Now it is set for Wednesday, September 21, 2005, please join us at the
Police Commission and hear the OCC charges brought against Officers
O'Malley, Sweeney, Paine, and Dimaposoc, who killed or tried to kill
Cammerin Boyd. We will hold a press conference on the steps of City Hall
at 5:00 p.m. just before the hearing.
We hope that the Community and all those who want to see change and
accountability will support us by being present at the hearing and by making
public comments demanding disciplinary charges against the officers.
Date: September 21, 2005
Time: 5:30 p.m.
Place: City Hall, Room 400, Polk St.
Press Conference: 5:00 p.m steps
of City Hall
Bring signs and friends.
Also, remember what happened in the Nelson hearing this last August,2005.
This is the officer that used his baton to brake Ms. Vaccarezza's arm during
an anti-war protest. Even though there was a video tape showing this man
beating her, and that she was no threat to his safety or any one else, the
Police Commission still voted to not uphold the OCC charges against this
man. The beating took place 2 years ago. The hearing just happened in
August, 2005. Commissioners Chan, Keane and Orr-Smith voted not to uphold
the OCC charges that Nelson acted unreasonably. These three Commissioners
(Chan, Keane and Orr-Smith voted in favor of the police and the POA even
though the City Attorney last year determined that Officer Nelson's conduct
was unreasonable). Commissioners Renne and Marshall voted to uphold the
charges and the City Attorney's decision. So you see, the decision not to
discipline Nelson is in essence still turning a blind eye so that the
"rubber stamping" continues.
Commissioner Keane is quoted in the chronicle as saying even though the
video tape clearly shows Ms. Vacarezza did not pose a threat to Nelson, and
Nelson continued to beat her while she was on the ground, that he would not
believe what is shown in the video over what Nelson's superior officers
believed occurred. Keane says he relied on Nelson's superivisors opinions
that Nelson's conduct was reasonable. Nelson should have been fired and
he wasn't. Maybe Keane did not really say this and he has been misquoted by
the paper, however that is exactly what occurred.
Nelson was cleared even though he has a history of beating people and
injuring them. He has numerous complaints about his conduct. SFPD does not
have a working "warning system" for notifying the Chief and its commending
officers of when an Officer has a history of abusive conduct. If they did,
then the Police Commission should be ashamed of approving Nelson's conduct.
They just gave Nelson the go ahead to continue using abusive conduct.
Commissioner Chan is assigned to the Cammerin Boyd case. He's in charge of
assembling the evidence that the Commission will review.
We can make a difference. We must continue the Campaign for
accountability. Peace Marylon
THE first hearing on the OCC charges in the Cammerin Boyd case was
continued again.
Now it is set for Wednesday, September 21, 2005, please join us at the
Police Commission and hear the OCC charges brought against Officers
O'Malley, Sweeney, Paine, and Dimaposoc, who killed or tried to kill
Cammerin Boyd. We will hold a press conference on the steps of City Hall
at 5:00 p.m. just before the hearing.
We hope that the Community and all those who want to see change and
accountability will support us by being present at the hearing and by making
public comments demanding disciplinary charges against the officers.
Date: September 21, 2005
Time: 5:30 p.m.
Place: City Hall, Room 400, Polk St.
Press Conference: 5:00 p.m steps
of City Hall
Bring signs and friends.
Also, remember what happened in the Nelson hearing this last August,2005.
This is the officer that used his baton to brake Ms. Vaccarezza's arm during
an anti-war protest. Even though there was a video tape showing this man
beating her, and that she was no threat to his safety or any one else, the
Police Commission still voted to not uphold the OCC charges against this
man. The beating took place 2 years ago. The hearing just happened in
August, 2005. Commissioners Chan, Keane and Orr-Smith voted not to uphold
the OCC charges that Nelson acted unreasonably. These three Commissioners
(Chan, Keane and Orr-Smith voted in favor of the police and the POA even
though the City Attorney last year determined that Officer Nelson's conduct
was unreasonable). Commissioners Renne and Marshall voted to uphold the
charges and the City Attorney's decision. So you see, the decision not to
discipline Nelson is in essence still turning a blind eye so that the
"rubber stamping" continues.
Commissioner Keane is quoted in the chronicle as saying even though the
video tape clearly shows Ms. Vacarezza did not pose a threat to Nelson, and
Nelson continued to beat her while she was on the ground, that he would not
believe what is shown in the video over what Nelson's superior officers
believed occurred. Keane says he relied on Nelson's superivisors opinions
that Nelson's conduct was reasonable. Nelson should have been fired and
he wasn't. Maybe Keane did not really say this and he has been misquoted by
the paper, however that is exactly what occurred.
Nelson was cleared even though he has a history of beating people and
injuring them. He has numerous complaints about his conduct. SFPD does not
have a working "warning system" for notifying the Chief and its commending
officers of when an Officer has a history of abusive conduct. If they did,
then the Police Commission should be ashamed of approving Nelson's conduct.
They just gave Nelson the go ahead to continue using abusive conduct.
Commissioner Chan is assigned to the Cammerin Boyd case. He's in charge of
assembling the evidence that the Commission will review.
We can make a difference. We must continue the Campaign for
accountability. Peace Marylon
For more information:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/isf23/
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Show us some proof of Nelson's abusive conduct. Give us names, dates, etc. Just because someone makes an OCC complaint doesn't mean the complaint isn't false or frivolous. And why won't you answer the one burning question that is on all of our minds? Why did Cammerin Boyd have a gun? If he was not doing anything illegal, why did he have that gun. Tell us. Why are you so afraid to answer the questions regarding Cammerin's actions. You are very quick to comment on the officers actions. Tell us about Cammerin's actions leding up to the shooting. TGhat is what this is all about. If Cammerin was not doing anything wrong or was not in posesion of a gun, then you are absolutely right, this was a bad shooting...so why don't you explain to us who you are trying to appeal to...what Cammerin was doing that night. Please Marylon...tell us. We're waiting.
We all want police accountabilty. But Cammerin also needed to be accountable for his actions that night. Show us evidence that Cammerin was an innocent victim and we will support the cause, but right now you aren't showing us anything. You are saying that since cammerin was shot, he was the victim. That doesn't work. If he is a true victim, give us the proof...otherwise the police acount of the incident must be true and Cammerin's shooting was completely justified. Where is the evidence, Marylon?
Your silence is defeaning.
If we tell you that Cammerin did not have a gun would you believe that? If we tell that when O'Malley shot Cammerin in the abdomen through the window of the right driver side door and Cammerin did not have a gun in his hands and his hands were raised surrendering, would you believe that? No matter how many times we tell you that there is clear proof of these facts, you will continue to be in denial because you do not wish to believe that a dirty undercover officer would kill a disabled man in cold blood with hallow point bullets which are illegal.
Does it matter what Cammerin did the night before? Does it matter what Cammerin did 15 minutes before? The issue is not proof of what Cammerin did days, hours, minutes before, but what was he doing at the time that they killed him. That's really the issue, isn't. Because if the police can kill suspects for what they did the night before then there would be no need for the criminal justice system. All that would be needed is a false report by the shooting officer saying the suspect did something the night before that in his opinion warrants the death penalty? Don't you agree?
So if you notice in the OCC charges not one police officer has stated or claimed that Cammerin had a gun in his hand and was shooting at or threateing to shoot at him when they killed him. What other proof do you need? There was no gun powder on Cammerin's hands or clothing, what other proof do you need? The officers are charged with lying under oath, what other proof do you need?
O'Malley is charged with firing into Cammerin's vehicle as he is stopped and is not threatening anyone. What other proof do you need? Shall we continue? Tell me what proof do you think woud satisfy you? The autopsy report says it can not exclude that Cammerin's hands were raised and that he was in a standing position when shot in the abdomen. What other proof do you need? Dozens of frightened witnesses said Cammerin was shoot with his hands raised surrendering? What other proof do you need? Does Cammerin need to beinnocent of all alleged charges in order to deserve to live and not be killed surrendering? Does allegedly shooting at an undercover officer who is admittedly shooting at Cammerin at Turk and Pierce streets, enough to justify shooting Cammerin after he came to stop and surrendered on Larch Way? What other proof do you need?
O'Malley after shooting Cammerin got into his undercover car and left the scene. What did he do after he left. Did he plant evidence, change evidence, change his gun? Where did he go? These questions should be asked rather than did Cammerin have a gun, because you know the answer to later, he didn't.
Does it matter what Cammerin did the night before? Does it matter what Cammerin did 15 minutes before? The issue is not proof of what Cammerin did days, hours, minutes before, but what was he doing at the time that they killed him. That's really the issue, isn't. Because if the police can kill suspects for what they did the night before then there would be no need for the criminal justice system. All that would be needed is a false report by the shooting officer saying the suspect did something the night before that in his opinion warrants the death penalty? Don't you agree?
So if you notice in the OCC charges not one police officer has stated or claimed that Cammerin had a gun in his hand and was shooting at or threateing to shoot at him when they killed him. What other proof do you need? There was no gun powder on Cammerin's hands or clothing, what other proof do you need? The officers are charged with lying under oath, what other proof do you need?
O'Malley is charged with firing into Cammerin's vehicle as he is stopped and is not threatening anyone. What other proof do you need? Shall we continue? Tell me what proof do you think woud satisfy you? The autopsy report says it can not exclude that Cammerin's hands were raised and that he was in a standing position when shot in the abdomen. What other proof do you need? Dozens of frightened witnesses said Cammerin was shoot with his hands raised surrendering? What other proof do you need? Does Cammerin need to beinnocent of all alleged charges in order to deserve to live and not be killed surrendering? Does allegedly shooting at an undercover officer who is admittedly shooting at Cammerin at Turk and Pierce streets, enough to justify shooting Cammerin after he came to stop and surrendered on Larch Way? What other proof do you need?
O'Malley after shooting Cammerin got into his undercover car and left the scene. What did he do after he left. Did he plant evidence, change evidence, change his gun? Where did he go? These questions should be asked rather than did Cammerin have a gun, because you know the answer to later, he didn't.
You have nothing to base any of that on except a couple crackhead "witnesses" who weren't even there....
How do you explain the one bullet that hit Boyd in the stomach had already gone through his wrist? Pretty tough to do with your hands raised....LOL...LOL
Do you really believe Boyd did not have a gun and did not shoot at the police and the community?
How do you explain the one bullet that hit Boyd in the stomach had already gone through his wrist? Pretty tough to do with your hands raised....LOL...LOL
Do you really believe Boyd did not have a gun and did not shoot at the police and the community?
Hollow point bullets illegal? Where the hell do you get your information? Just so you know, they are not illegal..LOL
We want you to tell us the truth as you know it. Honestly Cammerin Boyd looks like the asshole not the cops. I'm open minded and willing to change my mind but your campaign hasn't offered anything to get behind and support.
You killer cops are still holding on to lies --- and we understand your need to do so. After all, shooting a disabled man with his hands, both hands, raised surrendering is such a coward act, there can be no justification. Only lies and cover up.
You seem to have read something that makes you believe that Cammerin was shot through the abdomen and the bullet traveled to his hand. Where did you get that from?
Didn't you see the coroner's report? It was the Coroner who said that Cammerin was shot in the abdomen while standing and both hands raised. That's the physical evidence. Sorry your "crackhead" propaganda will not work!!!
The purported shot to his hand was done while he was falling after being shot in the abdomen. What's your answer to that?
After the OCC charges are upheld you killers will be recharged with the Crimes. We will see to that. Justice will be had. And we will see that all other killers are also removed from the departments across this country. Even Donald Rumfield now acknowledges that a bunch of you criminals infiltrated police departments across this country and you will be removed.
You seem to have read something that makes you believe that Cammerin was shot through the abdomen and the bullet traveled to his hand. Where did you get that from?
Didn't you see the coroner's report? It was the Coroner who said that Cammerin was shot in the abdomen while standing and both hands raised. That's the physical evidence. Sorry your "crackhead" propaganda will not work!!!
The purported shot to his hand was done while he was falling after being shot in the abdomen. What's your answer to that?
After the OCC charges are upheld you killers will be recharged with the Crimes. We will see to that. Justice will be had. And we will see that all other killers are also removed from the departments across this country. Even Donald Rumfield now acknowledges that a bunch of you criminals infiltrated police departments across this country and you will be removed.
LOL No need to get angry, everybody knows the Police are no different than a common street gang.
The Police sell the Drugs, Guns, and commit other crimes under the guise of protecting the public which is pretty good cover.
When they arrest a drug kingpin their really taking out a rival drug lord.
wrap you mind around that!!!
The Police sell the Drugs, Guns, and commit other crimes under the guise of protecting the public which is pretty good cover.
When they arrest a drug kingpin their really taking out a rival drug lord.
wrap you mind around that!!!
The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), The FBI, and the CIA are all trying to prove that they are the best at apprehending criminals. The President decides to give them a test. He releases a rabbit into a forest and each of them has to catch it.
The CIA goes in.
They place animal informants throughout the forest.
They question all plant and mineral witnesses.
After three months of extensive investigations they conclude that rabbits do not exist.
The FBI goes in.
After two weeks with no leads they burn the forest, killing everything in it, including the rabbit, and they make no apologies.
The rabbit had it coming.
The LAPD goes in.
They come out two hours later with a badly beaten bear.
The bear is yelling: "Okay! Okay! I'm a rabbit! I'm a rabbit!"
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$330.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network