Whack’em & Stack’em Update: A Classic Case of Butt-Covering

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/14/arjj021403.htm

Whack’em & Stack’em Update:
A Classic Case of Butt-Covering
Analysis by J.J. Johnson

If you recall in our previous report from San Antonio Texas, a 14 year-old girl was shot in the head by officers of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Many regular readers know by now that little Ashley Villarreal was taken off life-support yesterday. She’s dead.
Now, you’d figure that would be the main focus of the follow up stories, and what steps the DEA would take to ensure justice in this matter. But think again. This is a Whack’em & Stack’em clean up – at it’s best. Class is in session. Let’s walk through it, shall we?

DEA case troubled by timing
By Maro Robbins - San Antonio Express-News


The stakeout that ended with a 14-year-old girl shot in the head was part of a federal narcotics investigation that had been marked in recent days by several instances of unfortunate timing.

[The key here are the words ‘unfortunate timing’. You can translate that into, “it wasn’t our fault.†You see, in the whack & stack culture, it’s NEVER the fault of the executioner. By merely inserting the two above mentioned words, the reader will overlook the blatant disregard for public safety demonstrated by the DEA. Read on…]


Drug Enforcement Administration agents say they were looking for cocaine trafficking suspect Joey Villarreal and believed he might be trying to flee Sunday when they shot into the darkened car, driven by his daughter Ashley Villarreal.


[Just in case an eyebrow got raised over “they shot into the darkened car†meaning, they didn’t know who or what the heck they were shooting at, you can relax since the phrase “cocaine trafficking†was used in the same sentence. Already, the reader is feeling easier about the whacking of an unarmed, teen-aged girl]


Officials said the agent, Bill Swierc, fired as the sedan tried to ram him. But as family members arranged Wednesday for the girl's funeral, they dispute that she was to blame for her own death.


[Whack & Stack fans: How many times have you heard about that dead witness attempting to “ram†the officer? It’s like an epidemic: driver sees cop, cop pulls gun, driver hits the gas, cop has justified kill. It is a common tactic (excuse) used when explaining why they simply shot into a car. After all, you’re not going to get the other side of the story. That potentially damaging witness was lethally dealt with. And if you think we’re getting carried away with this, read the last part of that paragraph again:â€â€¦they dispute that she was to blame for her own death…â€

Excerpt from our previous report in this case:

“…Not to worry, the local police said they are conducting an investigation, and the DEA is cooperating. TRANSLATION: Give us a day or two to come up with a reason why that little 14 year-old girl deserved what she got…â€

As you can see, this is already the trial balloon that is being peddled on the streets of San Antonio. And by the way: if you go back to the original story, the girl also took enemy fire while backing the car up (conspicuously omitted in this version of their story). Let’s move on…]


The incident at South San Joaquin at Motes streets has inflamed local sentiment, both for and against the agents, and is under review by San Antonio police and a DEA team from Washington.


[Get it? Locals are outraged, as well they should be. But in a classic whack’em & stack’em, the mission is to make you forget about that, and focus only on what those wonderful ‘agents’ were doing to protect the public. Watch how this story suddenly changes direction.]


Meanwhile, in hindsight, the shooting was only one instance in which the timing appeared unfortunate. For example:


DEA agents helped Kerrville police arrest Villarreal on minor charges barely two days before federal agents were looking for him again, this time after receiving information alleging that he might bolt for Mexico.


While agents were searching for Villarreal, his lawyer says the 36-year-old musician was making plans to turn himself in. The meeting at the attorney's office ended roughly three hours before Ashley was shot.


When federal authorities charged Villarreal after the shooting, they based the complaint on information they had possessed for some time but had not wanted to use until the rest of the investigation ripened.


"He was and is part of an ongoing investigation in a larger drug trafficking case," said Greg Surovic, the assistant U.S. attorney who supervises federal drug task force prosecutions. "The plan was not to arrest him on Monday."


[Let’s stop right here – See how we’re suddenly into the drug case and the dead girl is all but forgotten? Go on – there’s more…]


But the chain of events that put agents in front of Villarreal's home on Sunday appeared to start two days earlier.


That's when Kerrville police Sgt. Harry Fleming received a tip alleging that the odor of marijuana had wafted from the hotel room Villarreal was renting…

[ Oh for Gosh sake – with the High Terror Alert going on these days, someone was smoking a joint – call in the SWAT TEAMS]

…The police, aided by DEA agents and others, set up surveillance. Court records indicate that they determined the room was being used to distribute drugs.


A search of the room found "white powdery substance" on the nightstand and floor, the documents state. Villarreal had cash totaling $986.

[If it was cocaine, they would have said it was cocaine. Lesson for all you travelers: Don’t spill that coffee creamer – your daughter’s life may depend on it]


Villarreal was charged with possessing less than a gram of controlled substance and driving with a suspended license. He spent the night in jail and posted bond Saturday.


After his release, investigators received the information alleging that he was about to flee the country.


[Sure, you just killed his daughter – thinking they were going after him. Yes, I’m sure I’d feel safe and have complete faith in the justice system after that. After all, you’re the only other witness to the execution.]


"There were things going on in the organization that probably led him to believe the heat was on," Surovic said.

[TRANSLATION: “The only way the DEA could cover their tracks is to set up another take down – this time not missing their target. We suspect is was trying to get out of our reach so we could finish the job.]


Surovic said a prosecutor came into the office and had typed up the complaint against Villarreal hours before Sunday's shooting. The document alleged that Villarreal was the "leader" of a cocaine trafficking group.

[…and you see – by the time you get to this point, you too would be almost convinced that that poor little girl had it coming. “Collateral damage†as they say.]


Meanwhile, the Villarreal family was adamant that Ashley should not be blamed. The girl's uncle, Pete Villarreal called the shooting senseless. He said nothing the girl did was suspicious enough to justify agents opening fire. As he put it, her only crime was driving around the block without headlights and without a license.


"She was killed because she committed a traffic violation," he said.


Visitation for Ashley will started at 2 p.m. Thursday, followed by a rosary at 7 p.m. at the Castillo Mission Funeral Home at 520 N. Gen. McMullen Drive. A Friday Mass was scheduled for 10 a.m. at St. Jude's Catholic Church at 130 S. San Augustine St. Burial will follow at San Fernando Cemetery No. 2.


"A 14-year-old girl," Pete Villarreal said, "should not be buried on Valentine's Day."

[And…may she rest in peace. You see Nick and Norm – the drug war DOES produce terrorism.]
 
I haven't heard a thing about this. I'm going to go run a search on it now, but it doesn't look good. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't these DEA agents admit that they fired into a dark car just because it belonged to a suspect they assumed was in it?
Doesn't sound like the "ramming" charge is going to hold water.

But then, it'll be forgotten, so I suppose that's not a problem, either.
 
The trend of the federales hosing innocents, because they failed to verrify the target is not new.

In April of, I think 1934:

Melvin Purvis and 15 agents of the FBI, accidentally hosed 3 innocent men with thompson machine guns after they got into their car. The FBI agents had hid in front of a road house at night lying in ambush for John Dillinger and his gang. The FBI agents did not identify themselves before they opened fire on the car. It turned out that they were just three businessmen out for a drink, two were killed and one survived.

Dillinger was at the road house, but escaped out the back window after hearing the machinegun fire.

Purvis an the other agents got off scott free.

:uhoh:

Lon Hourichi, Waco etc, are just a continuation of a long tradition.
 
Biased articles such as this one serve no purpose other than to feed into peoples preconceptions.
However, reading between the lines, it sounds like a cluster only the Feds could create.

I have asked this question in these "they tried to run me over shootings".
Why the hell were you in front or behind the car?
Doesn't it take less time to move than to shoot?

I was trained to get the heck out of the way, if indeed I did something as stupid as stand in front of or behind the car.

Local cops and DA's need to indict abberant Feds and reign them in, just as the Feds do to abberant local cops.
Tit for tat, yanno.
 
Biased articles such as this one serve no purpose other than to feed into peoples preconceptions.

Do you expect people to feel good about it then?

I'd say that Federales and local yokels getting trigger-happy does a good deal more to feed peoples' preconceptions than some newspaper article, unless you just blame newspapers altogether for reporting these incidents.
 
Written by an Architect some time ago, I find these words to be of little comfort until some form of action is taken. None the less, they are well written and only a part of the whole:

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government." (Good Lord could that man write; tho' I'm sure it helped to have Ben Franklin doing your editing)

Perhaps it is a lost cause and Thomas Jefferson's words could only work once in the "Course of human events"... or perhaps the people, or a portion thereof, were actually fed up to the point of bursting George's bubble.

Remember that these words were written months after April 19, 1775, when Paul Revere rode to cry out his warnings and a bunch of farmers stood on a bridge to stop the King's men on their way to confiscate weapons.

But... as long as I've got my TV, fully stocked refrigerator, two cars in the garage... and they're not coming after me, yet... it's somebody else's problem.

Remember, The King's Men Are Never Wrong!

And so it is.

Adios
 
I don't expect people to feel good about anything. Their emotions are up to them.
The article is biased garbage.

If indeed the vehicle was trying to ram the agent, then he was justified in shooting into it. You don't have to have target identification, you shoot at the drivers position.
In a life and death situation, you do what you have to do to survive.
The age of the driver means nothing, if indeed she was trying to ram the agent, she got what she deserved.

Now, did the shooting happen the way the agents portrayed it?
I dunno, that's the real question here.

All this crap over a small amount of drugs, what a waste.
 
Delta, conversly, if I see someone step out in front of my car and draw a firearm, I would immediately feel threatened and do my best to turn them into roadkill in order to save my life.
Who they were, who they worked for or why they thought they should do that would be secondary considerations at best.
Identifying them beyond "a threat" is unnessasary.
I doubt there was any intention of running him down anyway...I've seen my own daughter drive at 14.
 
You lose your right of self defense when a deadly force situation arises out of unwarranted aggression on your part. Law enforcement officers' aggression is normally justified only after they are plainly identifiable as LEO's to the people toward whom they are behaving aggressively.

In this case, the DEA agents created the deadly force situation by behaving extremely aggressively toward a girl who had no way of knowing that they were LEO's. By so doing in such a manner, they caused her to react in a way that they then described as "threatening".

Had they not demonstrated such aggressive behavior, or had they been identifiable as LEO's at the time that they demonstrated such aggressive behavior, the decedent's reaction to their behavior would have been unreasonable. As the decedent's reaction was to unreasonable aggression, the DEA agents had lost their right to self-defense, just as any citizen loses the right of self defense when they initiate a comfrontation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top