Killer Of Year Award For Unrepentant Cop; Why $3.5 Million Is Not Enough

Here is a story about a lawsuit being paid out because of a wrongful death on the part of the cops. It begins this way:

“Five years ago, a heavily armed special weapons and tactics team charged into a small ranch home in Easton — guns drawn and flash grenades exploding — and killed a Norwalk man who was quietly watching porn on TV in the den. Now five towns will pay $3.5 million to settle a lawsuit brought by the victim’s family.”

What is wrong with this story—other than the fact that a man was slaughtered in his own home for no reason? (Yes, he was sinning by watching pornography. But that doesn’t carry a death penalty! Even if it did, there is supposed to be a trial, not a summary execution.)

There are several things wrong about the story.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Godfather Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Trump Approval Rating Soars Past Obama’s Dampening on Democrat ‘Blue Wave’

What is wrong is the fact that the police who committed the homicide are not punished in any way. The taxpayers in the town are paying for their crime. The police don’t lose a cent.

What is wrong is the fact that the police get to continue insisting they did nothing wrong when they raided the house and killed the man on the spot. I don’t blame the man’s family for settling, but I wish they had gone to court to prove their case and get an official admission of guilt from the police who killed.

What is wrong is that Officer Michael Sweeney was awarded the Officer of the Year Award because of his part in the slaughter raid.

What is wrong is that police are permitted to offer the following rationalization for a deadly attack on a man in his home that resulted in his death: “the raid was based on a valid search warrant.” That is the new version of the “I was just following orders,” excuse.

What is wrong is that the police will keep raiding homes with guns and flashbang grenades because they know they can get away with it.

What is wrong is that most conservatives probably won’t speak out about this killing because the victim was watching pornography, and because drug paraphernalia was found on the site:

“A lifeless Guizan, 33, lay on the floor with six gunshot wounds, one through his left hand that penetrated his chest, two shots to the abdomen, one in the left groin, one to the right knee and one to the right upper arm. Terebesi, who had been pinned by Sweeney, was handcuffed and dragged out of the house. Team members searched the room and found two crack pipes and a tin containing a small amount of cocaine, but no guns.”

What is wrong is that there is no mention of the woman who made the original complaint, but who later admitted she had a dispute with the victim, facing any charges. We are all one anonymous tip or false accusation away from being assaulted by “law enforcement.”

The only thing that was right about this case was the judge who refused to throw out the lawsuit. In my opinion, he is as close to a hero as you will find in this story.

The whole thing is sickening.

Previous Rand Paul: Why Are We Giving Money To Countries That Hate Us?
Next AZ Gov Says Drug Cartels Ready to Cross into US Because Borders Not Secure


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.