Video is available for viewing at the bottom of the page.
The year is 2009 and the Mercury News is leading the lynch mob to hang police officers for alleged crimes without knowing all the facts. No doubt 100 years ago the Mercury News would have been leading the lynch mob to hang the nearest negro without knowing all the facts solely because a white person says they were attacked by a negro. These are the tactics the Mercury News is again using to inflame a lynch mob atmosphere and convict San Jose police officers for alleged excessive force. The latest accusations are based on a grainy cell phone video taken of officers trying to subdue a resisting suspect. The video I watched on the Mercury News web site is grainy at best and shows one officer with his back to the camera, a barely visible suspect on the floor and a barely visible officer striking at the suspect with his baton. Oh yes the audio that so offended the Mercury News reporter of the suspect screaming and the officers yelling at the suspect to turn over. Well I guess being level headed and objective doesn’t sell newspapers as well as being biased and shocking does. As a reasonable objective person I have some boring, objective and not so shocking questions.
1. Where is the rest of the video? I think that’s why Siskel and Ebert don’t critique a movie after just watching the last minute or two. They watch the whole movie before they open their mouths. The Mercury News states they reviewed the video showing Mr. Ho making a threatening comment about killing his roommate Mr. Suftin with a knife. Where’s ALL the video of ALL the actions of Mr. Ho and the police officers? Oh yea showing the whole video of Mr. Ho struggling and kicking at the officers doesn’t make the police officers look as blood thirsty. By Mr. Ho’s own account he wasn’t complying with the officers. He states he wasn’t fighting the officers, he was just looking for his glasses. I don’t know about you Mr. Mercury News but if I was being hit by police officers mistaking me looking for my glasses as resistance, I would definitely stop looking for my glasses and obey the officers.
2. The Mercury News says it appears that Mr. Ho was struck after he was handcuffed. It must be a different video they are keeping from us because I didn’t see it. I saw several baton strikes but I could not see any handcuffs. Oh yes I didn’t see any mention in the newspaper article of Mr. Ho alleging that he was struck after being handcuffed. I think that would be an important point that Mr. Ho would want to make. Also any rookie reporter would have asked Mr. Ho, “Hey Mr. Ho did you get hit after you were handcuffed?”
3. According to the Mercury News, Mr. Masouris, who video taped the incident states he originally told the police at the scene that their actions were reasonable and justified. He later sells the video or portion of the video to Mr. Ho’s attorney, Mr. Nguyen and recants his statement. Now after he sells the video he states that he made a false statement to the police because he feared the officers at the scene. He really felt the police officers response was unnecessary and excessive. If this is true why did he not report it later? Instead he makes a quick buck by selling it to Mr. Nguyen.
4. Lets talk about the 4 out of 6 “experts” that the Mercury News found to make a judgement without all the facts. Where did they find their “expert” school? From the back of a matchbook cover or cereal box? The only 2 experts that make any sense are the two that said you can not snap to judgment based only on that grainy video. You need all the facts to make a fair objective judgment.
Steve Ferdin, Co-Founder, Fugitive Watch