The man interviewed has severe facial and eye damages. I have to question, though, if it's the same man because of the beard. Maybe the man in the first video just looks clean shave because the film is blurry or maybe he could grow a short beard in four days. I don't know. Just asking. If this did happen, the "Transit cops'"/mercs' claim that they had to act so forcefully because he might be armed is ludicrous and despicable.
#51. To: Eric Stratton, FormerLurker, Jethro Tull, All (#43)
Thanks to both of you for the info.
Back when I had to stop at a checkpoint here some time ago and the policeman said he was from the next county over (i.e. out of his jurisdiction, or so I believed at the time), I thought about asking if he was lost but didn't. There had been some talk of downsizings and possible mergings in this county's area because of the economy that, afterwards, I remembered having heard about vaguely. So, I chalked it up to probably just some temporary arrangement due to needing more help than was available then for that extra work-detail, or as a joint-excercise to be thriftier and save money for both counties to gain experience and proficiency at the same time on the same 4th Amendment-violating, invasive procedures.
Then I found this REALITY BLOG article that I wanted to research because of this topic. It's about a Unified Police Force formed in Utah (Salt Lake County/Salt Lake Valley) to link all the different ones in that area together under a private corporation structure. Their elected Sheriff was appointed the CEO and the Sheriff's Department was dissolved. Now it's "called the 'Unified Police Department of Greater Salt Lake', or the 'Unified Police Department' for short." Need to study that more thoroughly but after I posted an excerpt from it in the thread, Unified Quest 2011, I remembered the checkpoint stop and vague merger talk that I hadn't thought much about since then, and it occured to me that maybe something like that has been going on here.
Now I'm thinking: Who are the people who think they can dissolve elected Sheriff's Departments and replace them with a corporate CEO if they want to? -- fragment the police into various splinter groups assigned to various Federal sectors or localized sectors and to private corporate special interest duties (like I've seen them doing regularly here with city personnel and vehicles) and then conglomerate them like their own private mosaic of security guards who are being paid by us to move against us with force and even excessive force at will -- age, gender, handicap, pregnant or still too early in the stages to look like it, no matter -- all "conveniently" filed somewhere for the more privileged under the umbrella of the DHS/"Homeland Security", I suppose is the direction they've been moved or they are moving towards "jurisdictionally".
So, if the corporateers think they can dissolve our elected Sheriff's and their departments and such to rearrange our police structures like their privatized furnishings so easily, we should declare dissolved whatever imagined authority they crazily think they have to do that.