*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Friday, May 27th, 2011 8:37am PDT - promote requested by original submitter Duckman33.

Police allege that the former Marine was involved in drug smuggling, robbery and human smuggling.

But a search of the home found nothing illegal. Officers found a handgun and body armour in the house.

The five SWAT team members remain on active duty. No criminal charges have been filed and no disciplinary action taken.

Mr Guerena's wife, Vanessa, said she heard her husband moaning as he lay dying, his body struck by 22 of the bullets.

Ms Guerena told ABC News: 'I saw his stomach, all the blood on the floor'.

She said her goal now is to 'clear his good name'. Ms Guerena said their son Joel keeps asking about his deceased father, 'Is he a bad guy?'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1391567/Iraq-war-vet-Jose-Guerena-did-open-SWAT-team-killed-him.html#ixzz1NZJKnTZx

Sounds like there was one primary shooter on the swat team. A second person sporadically shot after a notable delay. What got me was.. there was no verbal warning given in the clip. There was no identification given. The door was knocked open, and they began shooting in a matter of seconds.

The names of these swat guys need to be released. They should immediately be put on administrative leave and the situation should be investigated by an INDEPENDENT investigator. Charges need to be filed.

"No verbal warning?"

We can hear them shouting "POLICE SEARCH WARRANT" several times before they kick in the door. The audio is obviously from the helmet cam inside a car, so it's a bit muffled, but still... turn up your speakers.

They announced themselves.

Currently the best explanation I've seen is that his wife basically precipitated the situation, screaming about "men with guns" and getting her husband into a defensive state of mind, thinking his family was being threatened... for no reason.

>> ^rogueWRX:
Currently the best explanation I've seen is that his wife basically precipitated the situation, screaming about "men with guns" and getting her husband into a defensive state of mind, thinking his family was being threatened... for no reason.


Meh. Should his wife had had combat training also? Maybe she should have learned battlefield hand signals in order to deal w/ the police. If Mr. Guerena really did sleep through the sirens, exactly how could he have reacted differently.

I don't have the answers. Sounds like just another random government shooting of a citizen.

>> ^residue:

Police allege that the former Marine was involved in drug smuggling, robbery and human smuggling.
But a search of the home found nothing illegal. Officers found a handgun and body armour in the house.
The five SWAT team members remain on active duty. No criminal charges have been filed and no disciplinary action taken.
Mr Guerena's wife, Vanessa, said she heard her husband moaning as he lay dying, his body struck by 22 of the bullets.
Ms Guerena told ABC News: 'I saw his stomach, all the blood on the floor'.
She said her goal now is to 'clear his good name'. Ms Guerena said their son Joel keeps asking about his deceased father, 'Is he a bad guy?'
Read more: http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-1391567/Iraq-war-vet-Jose-Guerena-did-open-SWAT-team-killed-him.html#ixzz1NZJKnTZx


Can we stop noting the number of rounds used? One 15 round clip can be unloaded in about 5 seconds, so with two or three shooters, that's not much. Besides, the point of firing one round is to kill, the others are to confirm.

I am not even going to watch this video. I have had enough death videos for the day. (I just read the comments.)

Umm... I know we're supposed to automatically be outraged in cases like this, but if I have the story right, the man was pointing an AR-15 at the cops as they came through the door. Google that -- it's a pretty serious looking gun. Were the police supposed to wait until he started shooting at them and only then fire back? They had the siren going before they came in, they yelled something before they broke the door down, so what else were they supposed to do (other than not be there at all)?

>> ^marinara:

>> ^rogueWRX:
Currently the best explanation I've seen is that his wife basically precipitated the situation, screaming about "men with guns" and getting her husband into a defensive state of mind, thinking his family was being threatened... for no reason.

Meh. Should his wife had had combat training also? Maybe she should have learned battlefield hand signals in order to deal w/ the police. If Mr. Guerena really did sleep through the sirens, exactly how could he have reacted differently.
I don't have the answers. Sounds like just another random government shooting of a citizen.


Ugh.

Let's not make this a "government vs civilians" thing. And no one said the wife had to have COMBAT TRAINING. I'm not combat trained, but I know what 20 cops with cars and lights and "POLICE, SEARCH WARRANT" means.

i hope they all get fired and the wife gets millions

>> ^rogueWRX:

>> ^marinara:
>> ^rogueWRX:
Currently the best explanation I've seen is that his wife basically precipitated the situation, screaming about "men with guns" and getting her husband into a defensive state of mind, thinking his family was being threatened... for no reason.

Meh. Should his wife had had combat training also? Maybe she should have learned battlefield hand signals in order to deal w/ the police. If Mr. Guerena really did sleep through the sirens, exactly how could he have reacted differently.
I don't have the answers. Sounds like just another random government shooting of a citizen.

Ugh.
Let's not make this a "government vs civilians" thing. And no one said the wife had to have COMBAT TRAINING. I'm not combat trained, but I know what 20 cops with cars and lights and "POLICE, SEARCH WARRANT" means.


Yup I bet you do. Specially when you are woken up from a dead sleep. I'm sure you are fully aware of everything that's going on around you from the second you open your eyes, right?

Easy to say what you'd do or what you think you'd do when you aren't directly in said situation my friend.

>> ^Sarzy:

Umm... I know we're supposed to automatically be outraged in cases like this, but if I have the story right, the man was pointing an AR-15 at the cops as they came through the door. Google that -- it's a pretty serious looking gun. Were the police supposed to wait until he started shooting at them and only then fire back? They had the siren going before they came in, they yelled something before they broke the door down, so what else were they supposed to do (other than not be there at all)?


If the man was pointing a rifle at the swat/door, then the shooting is comprehensible. There is quite a difference between this and the downright manslaughter without justification in this video.

Where I live, we have the opposite problem: cops can barely defend themselves without the general public going ape-shit and instantly siding with the alleged culprits. In Geneva, a group of gangsters robbed an exchange bureau with automatic rifles, came out guns blazing at the cops during traffic hour (i.e. many civilians around...)
and now one of them is attacking the Geneva police in court, because he was shot although allegedly unarmed. (article en français)

>> ^hpqp:

>> ^Sarzy:
Umm... I know we're supposed to automatically be outraged in cases like this, but if I have the story right, the man was pointing an AR-15 at the cops as they came through the door. Google that -- it's a pretty serious looking gun. Were the police supposed to wait until he started shooting at them and only then fire back? They had the siren going before they came in, they yelled something before they broke the door down, so what else were they supposed to do (other than not be there at all)?

If the man was pointing a rifle at the swat/door, then the shooting is comprehensible. There is quite a difference between this and the downright manslaughter without justification in this video.
Where I live, we have the opposite problem: cops can barely defend themselves without the general public going ape-shit and instantly siding with the alleged culprits. In Geneva, a group of gangsters robbed an exchange bureau with automatic rifles, came out guns blazing at the cops during traffic hour (i.e. many civilians around...)
and now one of them is attacking the Geneva police in court, because he was shot although allegedly unarmed. (article en français)


That's only true if the cops had reason to be there in the first place. Which brings me to another problem, the issuance of search warrants without due diligence by judges. Proposed amendment to the 4th should be

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, on the penalty of perjury , and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. In the event that a search warrant is found to have been enacted wrongly and bodily harm is caused to the defendant, or anyone associated at the time and place of the warrants execution, the executing officers, all present at the time of execution, are to be be punished for whatever harm has come upon the defendant and or any associates. The minimum penalty for a wrongful death shall be a charge of manslaughter. Furthermore any property damages, including livestock, or household pets, shall also warrant appropriate restitution and punishment.

C'mon. You can hear them say "Police! Open the door!" before they bust it open. This guy was an idiot to pull a gun on SWAT cops serving a warrant. Don't make out that he's an innocent victim.

Innocent victim? Probably not. Stupid victim? Probably.

I have a rifle and a shotgun along with two separate pieces of body armor. Comes with being a Marine. Sometimes there's extra stuff and you end up with it. Does that mean I'm into any illegal activity? No. Maybe this guy is involved with all of that nasty business. Maybe he wasn't, but sure as hell they didn't need to fire that many rounds nor should be have had his weapon.



Initial news reports didn't say anything about sirens wailing or SWAT teams yelling anything, so that's where the outrage stems from. Seeing this though, no matter if you had just woken up, you're kind of stupid to grab a gun.

>> ^Sarzy:

Umm... I know we're supposed to automatically be outraged in cases like this, but if I have the story right, the man was pointing an AR-15 at the cops as they came through the door. Google that -- it's a pretty serious looking gun. Were the police supposed to wait until he started shooting at them and only then fire back? They had the siren going before they came in, they yelled something before they broke the door down, so what else were they supposed to do (other than not be there at all)?


What they were supposed to do, is try to get the man out of the house through some non-violent means.

Death Squad Damage Control in Tucson

>> ^JiggaJonson:

>> ^Sarzy:
Umm... I know we're supposed to automatically be outraged in cases like this, but if I have the story right, the man was pointing an AR-15 at the cops as they came through the door. Google that -- it's a pretty serious looking gun. Were the police supposed to wait until he started shooting at them and only then fire back? They had the siren going before they came in, they yelled something before they broke the door down, so what else were they supposed to do (other than not be there at all)?

What they were supposed to do, is try to get the man out of the house through some non-violent means.


So the fact that the man had an enormous assault rifle and was pointing it at the cops as they came in the door means nothing?

All I'm saying is that I don't think the cops who actually pulled the trigger are at fault here. Should they have even been there in the first place? Probably not. But that's not their call. Someone should be held accountable for this, but it's not those cops.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

>> ^Sarzy:
Umm... I know we're supposed to automatically be outraged in cases like this, but if I have the story right, the man was pointing an AR-15 at the cops as they came through the door. Google that -- it's a pretty serious looking gun. Were the police supposed to wait until he started shooting at them and only then fire back? They had the siren going before they came in, they yelled something before they broke the door down, so what else were they supposed to do (other than not be there at all)?

What they were supposed to do, is try to get the man out of the house through some non-violent means.


I love people who think like this. </sarcasm>

I guarantee you if you had any idea how the real world actually works you would see how stupid this kind of statement is.

@Sarzy @NaMeCaF

Sarzy - Don't act like there are no other ways of apprehending people who ALLEGEDLY have drugs in their home (he didn't) besides breaking down their front door with a fully armed entourage of SWAT members.

Namecaf - I know enough about the world to value human life over an alleged drug charge. Thanks for illustrating for me how people keep the mindset that allows a completely unjust killing like this to happen.

>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^JiggaJonson:
>> ^Sarzy:
Umm... I know we're supposed to automatically be outraged in cases like this, but if I have the story right, the man was pointing an AR-15 at the cops as they came through the door. Google that -- it's a pretty serious looking gun. Were the police supposed to wait until he started shooting at them and only then fire back? They had the siren going before they came in, they yelled something before they broke the door down, so what else were they supposed to do (other than not be there at all)?

What they were supposed to do, is try to get the man out of the house through some non-violent means.

So the fact that the man had an enormous assault rifle and was pointing it at the cops as they came in the door means nothing?
All I'm saying is that I don't think the cops who actually pulled the trigger are at fault here. Should they have even been there in the first place? Probably not. But that's not their call. Someone should be held accountable for this, but it's not those cops.


Sure they are. Why did they lie and say he fired at them first? Why did they seal the search warrant after the case starting getting publicity? Why were they ignorant to the fact of who lived at the house? Why wasn't Guerena's name on the search warrant if he was a suspect of criminal activity? Why is paramilitary police busting down his door and 4 or 5 others that day for marijuana? (Forget the fact they found NOTHING) Why did they have the urgency to bust down his door but then the "SWAT" team decides to clear the house with some sort of robot? Why did they deny paramedics access to Guerena for over an hour? Why did they change their story multiple times and now claim he was a suspect for home invasions?

You seem to be giving the cops a pass and blaming their superiors. I guess we should've applied that to those Third Reich officers that were only following orders too. The cops took an oath to uphold the constitution, so any abridgement of the 4th amendment rests squarely on their shoulders. And any law enforcement agency that makes excuses for it or tries to hide the truth about it is utterly corrupt. Honest and moral people are not going to carry out the orders of tyrants. If the people in charge are violating The Law, then the subordinates by default are going to be lawless thugs "just following orders".

The SWAT team had a ballistic shield, busted the door, and stood on the outside shooting in. Guerena may have a had a gun pointed at them but he never fired and still had the safety on. The SWAT team never clearly identified who they were, and just starting shooting. Even if this wasn't Guerena and it was a drug smuggler with a house full of drugs and money, what the SWAT team did is straight up murder and disregard for human rights.

Aaaand we've gotten to the hyperbolic Nazi comparisons. I knew there was a reason that I tend not to engage in these types of internet debates. No one ever convinces anyone of anything, and people just get worked up for nothing.

>> ^Sarzy:

Aaaand we've gotten to the hyperbolic Nazi comparisons. I knew there was a reason that I tend not to engage in these types of internet debates. No one ever convinces anyone of anything, and people just get worked up for nothing.


Aaaand welcome to the police state. A state of collective numbness and disregard for human life.

@JiggaJonson

Ok. First of all it's standard operating procedure for a SWAT team to perform a dynamic entry on a premises suspected to be holding drugs because they need to get in there and apprehend the suspect(s) quickly before they have time to flush or otherwise destroy the EVIDENCE. Whether he actually had drugs or not is a moot point. They had a warrant suggesting he did.

You've just proven you dont have the first idea of how these things work in the real world and instead have some kind of firmly held belief that drugs aren't a big issue and dealers, etc should be treated with kiddy gloves and asked to come out quietly and leave the evidence alone. What world are you living in?!

I value human life as much as the next guy, but when it's shoot or be shot you must make a snap decision and always assume the person pointing the gun at you is indeed intent on using it. You'd probably be happier if the suspect had have hosed down half the entry team before they started shooting back?

The simple fact is that in this situation the killing was definitely lawful. Whether they should have been there in the first place is a completely different question, but having announced them selves as police and serving a drug warrant and being faced with a suspect with military training and a high powered rifle aimed at them, they responded in a completely lawful manner.

@NaMeCaF

What's your address? I want to test your reaction under pressure and I think I smell marijuana smoke.
^Totally not a death threat

Actually, scratch that request. Turns out I dont need it; in some states they're already starting RANDOM searches. You know, just in case random citizens are drug dealers. I guess I'm stupid to not like that either, eh?

Good luck when they come knocking on your door, bitch.

NaMeCaF responds: "RANDOM PEOPLE COULD THROW AWAY RANDOM EVIDENCE IF WE DONT RANDOMLY SEARCH THEM DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. YOU DON'T KNOW HOW THE WORLD WORKS IF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!!!"

>> ^marbles:

>> ^Sarzy:
Aaaand we've gotten to the hyperbolic Nazi comparisons. I knew there was a reason that I tend not to engage in these types of internet debates. No one ever convinces anyone of anything, and people just get worked up for nothing.

Aaaand welcome to the police state. A state of collective numbness and disregard for human life.


Yep, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to an argument that the discussion is going overboard with Nazi comparisons with a claim that we're in a POLICE STATE, MAN!!!11!!

/bizarro world

>> ^Sarzy:

Yep, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to an argument that the discussion is going overboard with Nazi comparisons with a claim that we're in a POLICE STATE, MAN!!!11!!
/bizarro world


You're the one giving the cops a pass. Just doing what they were told right? That's no overboard comparison, so grow up. If you can't defend your statement then don't make it. The fact is there were plenty of apathetic and negligent people in Nazi Germany that sat idly by while people were rounded up and executed.
You would've fit right in. How's that for Nazi comparisons?

>> ^marbles:

>> ^Sarzy:
Yep, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to an argument that the discussion is going overboard with Nazi comparisons with a claim that we're in a POLICE STATE, MAN!!!11!!
/bizarro world

You're the one giving the cops a pass. Just doing what they were told right? That's no overboard comparison, so grow up. If you can't defend your statement then don't make it. The fact is there were plenty of apathetic and negligent people in Nazi Germany that sat idly by while people were rounded up and executed.
You would've fit right in. How's that for Nazi comparisons?


I can agree that American drug laws are ridiculous and in serious need of reform. But to make the statement that American drug policy is in any way analogous to what the Nazis were doing in the 1930s and '40s is asinine, and a little bit offensive, quite frankly.

As for whether these officers should have been there? No, probably not. But it's not exactly the murder of millions of people in terms of moral unambiguity. I'm sure someone could make the argument that drug laws need to be enforced with such vigilance (I won't make that argument, because I don't agree with it, but I'm sure someone could). I'm sure many of the cops in question have families to support. Are they supposed to quit their jobs because they disagree with American drug policy?

They identified themselves as best as they could, they went in, and they found themselves with an assault rifle pointed at them. Of course they shot the guy. There's nothing else they could have done, other than wait for the guy to start firing, and hope their kevlar protects them (which it probably wouldn't have against a gun like that).

>> ^Sarzy:

>> ^marbles:
>> ^Sarzy:
Yep, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to an argument that the discussion is going overboard with Nazi comparisons with a claim that we're in a POLICE STATE, MAN!!!11!!
/bizarro world

You're the one giving the cops a pass. Just doing what they were told right? That's no overboard comparison, so grow up. If you can't defend your statement then don't make it. The fact is there were plenty of apathetic and negligent people in Nazi Germany that sat idly by while people were rounded up and executed.
You would've fit right in. How's that for Nazi comparisons?

I can agree that American drug laws are ridiculous and in serious need of reform. But to make the statement that American drug policy is in any way analogous to what the Nazis were doing in the 1930s and '40s is asinine, and a little bit offensive, quite frankly.
As for whether these officers should have been there? No, probably not. But it's not exactly the murder of millions of people in terms of moral unambiguity. I'm sure someone could make the argument that drug laws need to be enforced with such vigilance (I won't make that argument, because I don't agree with it, but I'm sure someone could). I'm sure many of the cops in question have families to support. Are they supposed to quit their jobs because they disagree with American drug policy?
They identified themselves as best as they could, they went in, and they found themselves with an assault rifle pointed at them. Of course they shot the guy. There's nothing else they could have done, other than wait for the guy to start firing, and hope their kevlar protects them (which it probably wouldn't have against a gun like that).


Nice straw-man. The only thing offensive is your shameless pardon of the death squad. You can make all the excuses you want, it doesn't change the fact they busted his front door, stood outside behind a ballistic shield, and unloaded 70+ rounds. Guerena had probable cause to grab his gun. The death squad didn't follow their own rules of engagement and had no reason to fire. That is straight up criminal homicide.

I'm sorry, I thought I was debating with a vaguely rational person. "Death squad"??

I'm done.>> ^marbles:

>> ^Sarzy:
>> ^marbles:
>> ^Sarzy:
Yep, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to an argument that the discussion is going overboard with Nazi comparisons with a claim that we're in a POLICE STATE, MAN!!!11!!
/bizarro world

You're the one giving the cops a pass. Just doing what they were told right? That's no overboard comparison, so grow up. If you can't defend your statement then don't make it. The fact is there were plenty of apathetic and negligent people in Nazi Germany that sat idly by while people were rounded up and executed.
You would've fit right in. How's that for Nazi comparisons?

I can agree that American drug laws are ridiculous and in serious need of reform. But to make the statement that American drug policy is in any way analogous to what the Nazis were doing in the 1930s and '40s is asinine, and a little bit offensive, quite frankly.
As for whether these officers should have been there? No, probably not. But it's not exactly the murder of millions of people in terms of moral unambiguity. I'm sure someone could make the argument that drug laws need to be enforced with such vigilance (I won't make that argument, because I don't agree with it, but I'm sure someone could). I'm sure many of the cops in question have families to support. Are they supposed to quit their jobs because they disagree with American drug policy?
They identified themselves as best as they could, they went in, and they found themselves with an assault rifle pointed at them. Of course they shot the guy. There's nothing else they could have done, other than wait for the guy to start firing, and hope their kevlar protects them (which it probably wouldn't have against a gun like that).

Nice straw-man. The only thing offensive is your shameless pardon of the death squad. You can make all the excuses you want, it doesn't change the fact they busted his front door, stood outside behind a ballistic shield, and unloaded 70+ rounds. Guerena had probable cause to grab his gun. The death squad didn't follow their own rules of engagement and had no reason to fire. That is straight up criminal homicide.

>> ^Sarzy:

I'm sorry, I thought I was debating with a vaguely rational person. "Death squad"??
I'm done.>> ^marbles:
>> ^Sarzy:
>> ^marbles:
>> ^Sarzy:
Yep, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to an argument that the discussion is going overboard with Nazi comparisons with a claim that we're in a POLICE STATE, MAN!!!11!!
/bizarro world

You're the one giving the cops a pass. Just doing what they were told right? That's no overboard comparison, so grow up. If you can't defend your statement then don't make it. The fact is there were plenty of apathetic and negligent people in Nazi Germany that sat idly by while people were rounded up and executed.
You would've fit right in. How's that for Nazi comparisons?

I can agree that American drug laws are ridiculous and in serious need of reform. But to make the statement that American drug policy is in any way analogous to what the Nazis were doing in the 1930s and '40s is asinine, and a little bit offensive, quite frankly.
As for whether these officers should have been there? No, probably not. But it's not exactly the murder of millions of people in terms of moral unambiguity. I'm sure someone could make the argument that drug laws need to be enforced with such vigilance (I won't make that argument, because I don't agree with it, but I'm sure someone could). I'm sure many of the cops in question have families to support. Are they supposed to quit their jobs because they disagree with American drug policy?
They identified themselves as best as they could, they went in, and they found themselves with an assault rifle pointed at them. Of course they shot the guy. There's nothing else they could have done, other than wait for the guy to start firing, and hope their kevlar protects them (which it probably wouldn't have against a gun like that).

Nice straw-man. The only thing offensive is your shameless pardon of the death squad. You can make all the excuses you want, it doesn't change the fact they busted his front door, stood outside behind a ballistic shield, and unloaded 70+ rounds. Guerena had probable cause to grab his gun. The death squad didn't follow their own rules of engagement and had no reason to fire. That is straight up criminal homicide.



You're done? what, apologizing for murderous thugs?
Good call!