Film The Cops, They Arrest You And Shoot Your Dog

WARNING – Graphic Video!

Viral Video Appears To Show Hawthorne Police Fatally Shoot Dog

A video posted online apparently shows Hawthorne police officers fatally shooting the dog of a man filming a nearby barricade situation, an attorney said Monday.

The undated video posted June 30 on YouTube shows a man driving up to an apparent police barricade at 137th and Jefferson and then stopping to use his camera to capture images of the scene.

Attorney Michael Gulden said his client Leon Rosby was watching and taking video of the Hawthorne SWAT team when police claimed Rosby was obstructing officers during the barricade.

Rosby is seen in video footage walking with the dog – which appeared to be a Rottweiler – near several patrol cars to capture the scene on his phone.

After an exchange with nearby officers, Rosby is heard saying the words, “civil rights violation” before returning the dog to his vehicle.

As officers begin to proceed toward Rosby, he also begins walking in the direction of the officers and is then taken into custody without any further exchange.

While Rosby is handcuffed, the dog is seen escaping from the vehicle through an open rear window and then approaching the officers while barking.

When one officer motions toward the animal, the dog is seen jumping up and toward the officer, at which point four shots were fired, according to Gulden.

I understand why they shot the dog. What I can’t figure out is why they arrested the man in the first place. I can’t see any crimes being committed. He certainly didn’t appear to be obstructing the police.

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Bad Cop No Donut and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

73 Responses to Film The Cops, They Arrest You And Shoot Your Dog

  1. DeniseVB says:

    I can’t watch the dog being shot 😦 So here’s a cop joke …….

    Woman: Is there a problem, Officer?
    Officer: Ma’am, you were speeding.
    Woman: Oh, I see.
    Officer: Can I see your license please?
    Woman: I’d give it to you but I don’t have one.
    Officer: Don’t have one?
    Woman: Lost it 4 times for drunk driving.
    Officer: I see…Can I see your vehicle registration papers please.
    Woman: I can’t do that.
    Officer: Why not?
    Woman: I stole this car.
    Officer: Stole it?
    Woman: Yes, and I killed and hacked up the owner.
    Officer: You what?
    Woman: His body parts are in plastic bags in the trunk if you want to see.

    The Officer looks at the woman and slowly backs away to his car and calls for back up. Within minutes 5 police cars circle the car. A senior officer slowly approaches the car, clasping his half drawn gun.

    Officer2: Ma’am, could you step out of your vehicle please!

    The woman steps out of her vehicle.

    Woman: Is there a problem sir?
    Officer2: One of my officers told me that you have stolen this car and murdered the owner.
    Woman: Murdered the owner?
    Officer2: Yes, could you please open the trunk of your car, please.

    The woman opens the trunk, revealing nothing but an empty trunk.

    Officer2: Is this your car, ma’am?
    Woman: Yes, here are the registration papers. The officer is quite stunned.
    Officer2: One of my officers claims that you do not have a driving license.

    The woman digs into her handbag and pulls out a clutch purse and hands it to the officer. The officer snaps opens the clutch purse and examines the license. He looks quite puzzled.

    Officer2: Thank you ma’am, one of my officers told me you didn’t have a license, that you stole this car, and that you murdered and hacked up the owner.
    Woman: Bet you the lying bastard told you I was speeding, too!

  2. votermom says:

    Guess who’s behind those Turkish protests? LOL.

  3. yttik says:

    My entire town has jury duty. They’ve even called up half the nursing home. Yesterday they asked this woman if she was intimately acquainted with anyone involved in the case. She says, “No, but I’m married to that one.” It gave me a chuckle.

  4. votermom says:

    Roger Simon: Is America in a Pre-Revolutionary State?

    I would think it should be, but it isn’t.

    • Of course not. Free food to fill the belly; free phones to fill the time. Intentional misdirection, or what was once called “bread & circuses”.

    • leslie says:

      Oddly enough, my 2 prog sibs (and their spouses) are now calling for bronco’s impeachment. But I don’t think they’ll join any revolution. Really, that they’ve begun talking impeachment independently and simultaneously – is impressive. When I told them it wouldn’t happen because congresspeople – on both sides – were” in the know” to begin with, they remorsefully said they should’ve listened to me in the beginning (2008).

      • votermom says:

        Ask them if they’ll listen to you from now on on politics. 🙂

        • wmcb says:

          How many times do we have to be dead-on right before they start realizing that we might be more accurate observers and better predictors than they are?

        • votermom says:

          I think they need to turn off the news & talk shows on tv first. It’s the constant “this is what’s happening and how you should think about it” that keeps them befuddled.

  5. What I see in the video is a case of felony Mopery, with intent to Gawk. All else flows from that.

    • 49erDweet says:

      But seriously, Rosby foolishly (IMO) interjected himself into some type of police action – notice him waving the camera at the officers on the sidewalk? Once they took notice of him, the next step was detainment and security, followed by field interrogation. He may not have been under arrest when he was handcuffed, though to some that seems a fine point, but when his dog entered the scene all bets were off.

      He could have stood on that corner as a bystander all day, but when he began seeking police attention he sorta got a little more than he intended. Moral. Don’t poke the lion with a stick.

  6. votermom says:

  7. I’m sure it was it all innocently done under the highest of journalistic standards and ethics. hahahahahahahahahahaha oops!

  8. myiq2xu says:

    Ashleigh Banfield is an exception to the general rule that wearing glasses makes you look smarter.

    OTOH she does seem more intelligent if you turn the volume off.

  9. votermom says:


  10. votermom says:

    • DandyTiger says:

      Erickson’s ass is showing.

    • wmcb says:

      Most of the “true” conservatives and conservatarians on Twitter and elsewhere can’t stand Erickson. He’s an establishment lapdog. Also there is this in that article, which made me laugh:

      I swear, RedState should do a fund raiser to get Erick Erickson a penile implant in hopes that he’ll one day get over his fear and loathing of strong women.

      What’s curious to me, as someone who has only for the last 3 years been watching the fault lines on the right, is that the establishment and the press and the consultants and the Dems have it all wrong. The ones that they keep screeching are the problem, i.e. the Palins and Cruzes and Rand Pauls, are the only hope for the GOP. That’s almost hilarious to me. The liberty-minded wackobirds are the ONLY group on the right that have a snowballs chance in hell of ever leading a groundswell of populist, blue-collar, working class support for the right. Instead of seeing that, the GOP has been on a mission to tamp them down, and is chasing ethnic identity politics with a vengeance – looking futilely for a group they can manipulate into supporting their cushy status quo. Sorry GOP, but you are DUMB – the Dems already have the “free shit party” angle covered, and you will not outbid them.

      If something doesn’t give soon, there WILL be a split. And while that would benefit the Dems and crush the GOP in the short term, I think in the long term it would be the best hope for the country. It might take a few election cycles, but I could see a liberty-minded party eventually uniting the unwashed masses from both left and right who have been ignored by both legacy parties, and are tired of the whip-up-ethnic-resentment-and-bribe-with-free-shit-to-justify-our-obtrusive-State games.

      If a real party developed that was focused like a laser on civil liberties, fiscal prudence, military strength coupled with a non-interventionist mindset, and mostly leaving people alone – while including modest safety nets? It could be HUGE within a cycle or three.

      • DandyTiger says:

        Losing a few more cycles and having amnesty followed by new waves of illegals will accelerate more economic collapse and despair among the working class. Either a new majority party will be born or there will be fire in the streets. I wouldn’t bet which one will happen first though.

        • wmcb says:

          Yep. There was a window around 2010/2011 when the GOP could have reversed this, and gotten behind the libertarian/conservative types as their only hope. They have obviously chosen instead to go to war with them at worst, or try to marginalize them at best.

          Bad move. Because if the only choice left for those disgusted with the whole system is two D/R faces of the same old system, then you are forcing them (us) to a breaking point. The GOP is betting that we fear the Dems, and what they would do with a few years of unfettered control, enough to get in line. I think that’s a bad bet.

          I am seeing a LOT of “Let it burn, then we rebuild” sentiment. A lot. I’m seeing a willingness to become the guerilla opposition, with no party, no support from those in power, but a determination to tear down the bastards. If the country is sunk regardless, then what’s to lose?

          I could see an election where the Dems get 50%, the R’s get 30%, and a third liberty party gets 20%. Bad? Yep. But what happens the next cycle? Does the liberty party get 40%? I see a fuckload of people ready and willing to roll those dice. Because they are NOT being represented by either party.

        • myiq2xu says:

          Just like there was a window of opportunity for the Democrats in 2006-08. Then the wrong people took control of the party.

        • wmcb says:

          Exactly, myiq. It’s was clear then that the D’s were more about protecting and expanding their turf and their power than the country.
          Now it’s the GOP’s turn to demonstrate the same mindset.

          It’s this mindset:

          “The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” — Robert A. Heinlein

          Both major parties have a burning desire to control the populace. The only difference is what levers they wish to use to do so.

      • Constance says:

        I don’t know, I think it could be more like Republicans 20 Dems 41 USA peoples party 39 the first election. I see a lot of people who are stunned and mad at what 5 years of Democrats has done to the country. The thing I find odd is there are about to be major lay offs where I work and so people are trying to cover their asses for health insurance for their families. I work with all Democrats and not one of them truly believes that Obama care can be relied on for their family’s insurance coverage starting in Jan 2014. They all have a WTF?! attitude regarding the immigration bill which is the only thing congress and Obama can focus on. Everyone knows people over 55 forced out of their profession because they were laid off and can’t find another job. Everyone knows college grads who can’t find a job. Retired people who need stable investments have not been able to earn any interest on their savings and have pretty much been pushed into risky stock market investments if they want to keep even with inflation. Many groups of people are not happy with the way the country is being run and people in The Capitol are oblivious to political reality.

  11. votermom says:

    Mubarak must be laughing is butt off

  12. myiq2xu says:
  13. DandyTiger says:

    Just noticed what the penalties can be for Zimmerman if they get him on manslaughter instead of 2nd degree murder. Effectively life. Because Martin was under 18, the max is 30 years vs. 15. Similarly because a gun was involved, you can add a max of 30 more. Then you add all the crazy extras like conspiracy to keep his eyes open, aggravated driving, etc., given his age can actually add up to a life sentence. And it seems clear that this judge would throw the max at him. Anything to appease the political atmosphere.

  14. The prosecution has brought in a medical examiner who didn’t….wait for it…examine Trayvon’s body. They are now arguing over dictionary definitions.

  15. mothy67 says:

    How can obama with a straight face say that everyone can’t have a car without the earth boiling over when he has in the last few years created more of a carbon footprint than an entire state?

  16. DeniseVB says:

    Oh some happy news:

    Funny that the conservative blogs are hoping she replaces O’Reilly, I guess he’s not as all powerful as he think he is 😀

Comments are closed.