Richard Chrisman, Killer Phoenix Cop, Canned

Chrisman:Scouring the want ads tonight?

Phoenix Police Officer Richard Chrisman, who faces a second-degree murder charge in the October 5 shooting death of South Phoenix resident Daniel Rodriguez, was terminated today by the City of Phoenix.

Phoenix Police Department spokesman Sergeant Tommy Thompson issued the following statement to the press via e-mail:

"In answer to questions from the media, a Loudermill Hearing was held today for Officer Richard Chrisman. The decision was made to terminate Officer Chrisman's employment. The separation process is anticipated to conclude by early next week."

Public Safety Manager Jack Harris was looking to fire Chrisman back in early November, but Chrisman's civil attorney Kathryn Baillie, who works for the firm that represents the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, sought and received a preliminary injunction from Superior Court Judge Donald Daughton, putting plans to kick Chrisman to the curb on hold.

But on February 28, Daughton issued a minute entry, allowing Baillie to file a special action with the Arizona Court of Appeals to seek a further stay. Daughton stated that unless the Court of Appeals ruled otherwise, his preliminary injunction order would be lifted.

The Court of Appeals denied Baillie's motion for a stay on March 18, opening the way for the City to conduct a Loudermill hearing, which is the hearing of last resort before a public employee is axed.

Obviously, it didn't go too well for Chrisman.

PLEA has vigorously defended the dues-paying Chrisman, bailing him out of jail, assisting him with legal representation, and doing its best to undermine the account of the shooting offered by non-PLEA member Officer Sergio Virgillo.

Helping members with legal representation is one of PLEA's duties, of course. Sliming a fellow cop? PLEA does that for pure joy, apparently.

Both Virgillo and Chrisman responded to a 911 domestic violence call from Rodriguez's mother on October 5. Rodriguez was unarmed, though a toxicology report later showed he had meth in his system.

During the incident, Chrisman killed Rodriguez's dog and struggled with Rodriguez, eventually gunning the man down. Virgillo told investigators that neither Rodriguez nor the canine posed a threat to either officer.

Chrisman refused to speak to investigators and quickly lawyered up, with the assistance of PLEA. In addition to the second degree murder charge, he's facing a charge for aggravated assault and cruelty to animals.

Last week, Rodriguez's mother Elvira Fernandez filed a $30 million notice of claim against the City of Phoenix for the wrongful death of her son.

One wonders how much money, pain and agony could have been avoided if the City had fired Chrisman after he admitted to planting a crack pipe on a mentally ill homeless woman in 2005, an outrage that was captured by a security camera.

This grotesque, and likely criminal shenanigan landed Chrisman on the Brady List, the County Attorney's roll call of cops whose bad behavior must be disclosed to defense counsel.

Chrisman should have had his Loudermill hearing then. This is regardless of whether he is innocent or guilty of second degree murder in the 2010 Rodriguez killing.

You can anticipate the spin from PLEA and its sleazy president Mark Spencer. In fact, you may see it tonight on CBS 5/KPHO, otherwise known as "PLEA TV."


My Voice Nation Help
61 comments
Cae973
Cae973

I read online that Virgillo was a detective with narcotics but was demoted when his wife and brother in law were caught dealing drugs from his home. Needless to say if a narc detective can't see whats under his own roof I wouldn't put any trust in anything he said...sounds to me like he should have been terminated but apparantly had friends in high places that saved his tush and now he s going to return the favor.

Christina Palmer
Christina Palmer

i love and have faith in u uncle richard and dont listento all the haters keep ur head up     XOXO Chrissy

Suck A Fat One
Suck A Fat One

i hope your uncle gets found guilty....then has do to 25 years in a shithole prison with the very same people he arrested. hopefully he wont make it past his first day on the yard.

Libertynation
Libertynation

Anything could be changed behind closed doors......You as the public should not buy into what the news are your police dept tells you......and your goverment for that matter. The world is not as you think it should be, if you do believe it is, There's people that bank on your ignorace.

Nassyman
Nassyman

This ASSHOLE looks like a fucking REDNECK white bread right wing KKK cocksucker!  I'd LOVE to put MY FUCKING GUN TO HIS FUCKING HEAD and squeeze the fucking trigger!  LOUSY FUCKING NO GOOD ROTTEN MOTHERFUCKING COCKSUCKING SONOVA FUCKING BITCH! FUCK YOU TO TEARS and I HOPE YOU BURN IN FUCKING HELL,  FUCK WAD!!! 

Christina Palmer
Christina Palmer

and ur an illitrete dumb ass watch ur mouth fag boy!!!!!!!

901Fan
901Fan

He may look like a redneck, but his hispanic girlfriend is kinda hot.  Hes some kinda cheesy racist if he hates hispanics but dates one dont ya think?

901Fan
901Fan

He may look like a redneck, but his hispanic girlfriend is kinda hot.  Hes some kinda cheesy racist if he hates hispanics but dates one dont ya think?

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

That is because you are a racist.

Nassyman
Nassyman

How am I a "racist?"  What the hell do YOU know anyway?  Ever had to kill 3 redneck assholes who tried to kill you just because they saw you were HOMELESS and destitute and figured "because we can" ?    Huh?  Until that happens to YOU, God forbid, shut the fuck up!  You don't know what in fuck you're talking about, MORON! 

Maxonepercent
Maxonepercent

"What the hell do YOU know anyway?" I'll tell you what I know about you just from your postings here: not only are you a foaming-at-the-mouth racist but you are also a pathological LIAR who clearly has little grip on reality.  You killed 3 men while you were homeless?  I call bullshit on that.  Are you sure that it actually happened or is it possible that the whole thing was a hallucination because you were off your meds again?  In other words: prove it or STFU.

Breakfastdelicious
Breakfastdelicious

CANNED? HE SHOULD BE TRIED AND SENT TO DEATH ROW FOR MURDER. SCUM OF THE EARTH!

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

In the eyes of the law a man is innocent until proven guilty.  It is funny how all you cop-haters out there are willing to see him executed before he even has a day in court.  Thank god you people have no power.

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

I am totally perplexed by all of the support for Daniel Rodriguez and all of the blind hatred for Officer Crisman on this issue. I put forth that if we take race out of the equation and just look at the facts in this case there would be no condemnation of Officer Crisman here whatsoever:

Let's start with the character of the deceased:

1. Daniel Rodriguez was a violent ex-convict with a lengthy criminal record.2. At the time of the incident he was under the influence of meth3. His own mother called the police on him because he was threatening her4. He refused to follow the orders of the police, even after being pepper sprayed and tased.

Now, I understand that a lot of people want to make this man out to be some innocent victim, or a martyr of "police racism", but let's be honest: Daniel Rodriguez was criminal scum. People like Daniel Rodriguez are the reason we have police in the first place, it doesn't matter what his ethnic background is.

Now let's look at Officer Crisman. First of all, I know that the vast majority of New Times readers have a pathological hatred for the police, but it takes a very stubborn person to not admit that they have a very difficult job. They risk their lives dealing with the worst kind of human beings every day so that the decent folk in the world do not have to. Furthermore, it is not like Officer Crisman was working in Scottsdale either, the South Phoenix area that he worked in is one of the most dangerous in the city, which means that his job is even harder and more dangerous.

Is Officer Crisman a saint? Impossible to answer. The one thing we do know is that unlike Daniel Rodriguez, Officer Crisman is a law abiding citizen with no criminal record. By all accounts he was a good police officer.

Lastly, the other officer's account of what occurred shows a clear escalation of force by the police and a perpetrator who refused to comply with police orders. In the end he "scuffled" (Virgillio's own words) with Officer Crisman and was shot. Whatever your definition of "scuffled" is, no one can argue that what occurred was some sort of physical struggle between Rodriguez and Crisman, which occurred after the suspect had already been pepper sprayed and tasered.

Anyone with even a modicum of common sense knows that fighting with the police is a sure-fire way to get shot. Clearly Daniel Rodriguez was too stupid/high to posses much in the way of common sense. From the perspective of a law abiding citizen, the world is undoubtedly a better place without Daniel Rodriguez in it.

So why, then, is this case such a big deal? Simple: Hispanic racism toward white people. You see hispanics have been so indoctrinated with politically-motivated rhetoric about "racism" for the past several decades that as a group they have become obsessed with a overblown sense of persecution at the hands of whites. As a result many of them are constantly on the lookout for any perceived injustice, no matter how slight. Because such cases are difficult to find many are quick to jump on anything that has even the slightest hint of "racism" and run with it.

Ironically, this obsession with finding "racism" is actual racism. So, in truth it is not David Rodriguez who was the victim of racism it is actually Officer Crisman who is the victim of racism.

GKC7
GKC7

So you just sort of ignored the disciplinary rip he got for planting a crack pipe on a suspect that was documented in his file?

Jeremiah Ellison
Jeremiah Ellison

1. Irrelevant. 2. Irrelevant. 3. Irrelevant. 4. Irrelevant.

Deadly force is to be reserved for situations where a perpetrator's actions threaten deadly force or grave bodily harm. Even if the suspect had a dozen loaded firearms on his person and one in each hand, the officer should not exercise deadly force if the suspect never raises a weapon.

In fact, if the officer drew his weapon, in the manner the report describes, pointing it at the suspect when the suspect posed no serious threat, I think the suspect would be justified in killing the officer. I would acquit if I were a juror in that murder trial. The officer threatened unjustified deadly force. Self defense. Citizens don't get away with that, neither should police.

A firearm should never be used as leverage in a non-deadly confrontation.

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

"the suspect posed no serious threat"

The man was high on meth, had been tased and pepper sprayed and was still resisting.  If that doesn't constitute a serious threat I don't know what does.  He had an unrestrained pitbull as well, which is also a serious threat that warrants the weapon to be drawn, so there is also that to consider.

"A firearm should never be used as leverage in a non-deadly confrontation"

What constitutes a non-deadly confrontation?  There have been instances where police have been beaten to death by unarmed assailants who were high on drugs, so I am not sure that argument holds much weight.  Also, the report says that Rodriguez scuffled with Crisman while Crisman's weapon was unholstered.  In this case it seems likely that Crisman was afraid that Rodriguez was attempting to take the gun away from him, which is certainly grounds for using deadly-force.

Look, the simple truth here is that the deceased was high on meth, refused to cooperate with police, was pepper sprayed and tased, and then he physically fought with an officer who had his gun drawn.  What more do you need?  Stop wasting your energy on this case, there has got to be a better example of police brutality out there somewhere.

Kungfudoc
Kungfudoc

1. It is relevant when the mother informed the officer on arrival and the emotionally disturbed state Rodriguez was in when confronted. 2. you are correct,only if said athlete was making a threat, then said athlete physical condition could be used as a justification for escalation of force.  Seems you fleft some info out to make your statement true.  That info you patently left out,  was probably due to the fact it would defeat your own argument.  3.Rodriguez was making threats against someone in his household and did assault his mother, AKA probable cause to enter domicile and make contact via domestic violence, ergo your John Bad Elk reference is moot.  But I guess since you are parroting another individual and not actually researching the case you can be excused for your ignorance.  Another thing ownership of the domicile would be in dispute regardless of the name on the lease or deed as she was an inhabitant.  BTW the John Bad Elk case said that it was not murder but manslaughter.  That does not mean that it was legal.  

Jeremiah Ellison
Jeremiah Ellison

1. I don't know why you bother to repeat the meth line. The officer would not have been able to determine if the guy was on meth, so that has no play on determining the danger of the situation.

2. Not an angry outburst at all. A calculated comment. If drugs increase physical capacity, and therefore pose a greater threat, then anyone with a greatly increased physical capacity pose a greater threat.

3. Court decisions: http://www.markmccoy.com/self-...Supreme Court - "Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary."http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/...

"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery." (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

"When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified." Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.  (And before you comment that he was not without fault, the only thing he was guilty of up to that point was breaking things in his own residence. Not a crime. The fact that his mother was afraid he might hurt her does not mean he was at fault, as he had done nothing to her.)

"These principles [of self defense] apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence." Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

4. The firearm was drawn and pointed at the Rodriguez before violence began. You cannot justify the use of the firearm at that point by the actions that followed.

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

1. "1st off, come into my home unwanted & point a gun at my head & you will for sure experience hell." If your own mother had called the police on you and you were refusing to comply with their lawful orders and you continued to resist to the point that the police pulled their gun it would actually be you that experiences hell, just ask Daniel Rodriguez.

2. "Having a gun pointed at my head wld not only enrage me but wld cause me to use more force than what was intended for me!" If you are dumb enough to fight against a police officer who has a gun pointed at your head than you deserve to be dead because you obviously have zero self-control and you are a menace to society.

3. "Or how about I go into your home & point a gun at your head & see if you will "cooperate"." Unless you were a police officer with cause to be in my home you wouldn't even get two feet in the door.  Any "BlackJesus'" that tries to come into my home uninvited will be met with a face full of 12-gauge buckshot before they even see the whites of my eyes, it is called "self-defense".  Secondly, if the police were in my home ordering me to do something I would comply unless I was feeling like committing suicide, because resisting the police is suicide any way you look at it.  More importantly though, I would never have such a situation like that occur to me because I am (1) not a deranged meth-head who threatens his elderly mother (2) not stupid enough to attract that kind of attention.

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

I honestly don't know why I am bothering to argue with you because it is patently obvious that you are blinded by hatred for all law-enforcement and you have no comprehension of the actual law.

1. Being high on meth is most certainly relevant.  Why?  Because drugs like that are clinically proven to increase aggression and decrease the ability to feel pain.  A person on any type of amphetamine is far more dangerous than some on who is not.  Moreover, the fact that he absorbed pepper spray and tasering and kept on resisting is good proof that the meth was preventing his body from responding normally.

2. "Bullshit on you if you don't think so."  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!  Nice comeback buddy :)  Let me paraphrase you: "I know I can't prove this asinine point I am trying to make so I am just going to make a nonsensical angry outburst and call it done."  Good form.

3. You write that Rodriguez was justified in attempting to take the gun away from the officer.  There are so many problems with this argument I don't even know where to begin.  First, where is there a single legal precedent that gives a person the right to disarm an officer of the law who is in the process of making an arrest?  There is none, the whole idea would negate the authority of all police officers completely.  Secondly, it is beyond stupid to try and take a firearm away from someone, so stupid that is tantamount to suicide.  The fact that Rodriguez would even attempt something so reckless is a good indication that he was insane (probably from the drugs he was on) and incredibly dangerous.

4. "Do you really think that the events leading up to the officer drawing his weapon and pointing it at Rodriguez justified the use of deadly force?"  Yes and I feel very confident that the courts will agree.  Here is why: Rodriguez withstood every physical restraint system the police had at their disposal, he was high on a dangerous drug that is known to make people violent and immune to pain, even though the officer had his gun drawn Rodriguez fought with him possibly trying to take the weapon from the officer.  The officer's actions will be determined to be justified, mark my words

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

 Are you commenting to yourself?  That is a whole new kind of bat-shit insanity right there.  Or maybe you are just too dumb to use the internet correctly.  Big shock...

BlackJesus
BlackJesus

Also, you are defending a murderer. What's next? You gonna petition to let off every child molester? You need to be hanged right next to that murderous pig for your stupidity & lack of common sense & compassion....fuckin jerk.

BlackJesus
BlackJesus

Your an idiot & you shld change your screen name to one percent common sense...1st off, come into my home unwanted & point a gun at my head & you will for sure experience hell. Having a gun pointed at my head wld not only enrage me but wld cause me to use more force than what was intended for me! Or how about I go into your home & point a gun at your head & see if you will "cooperate". But judging from you ignorant attempts at posts, you sound like a lil bitch that wld put your tail between your legs and comply...

Jeremiah Ellison
Jeremiah Ellison

"The man was high on meth"

Irrelevant. Coroner's report. Not a factor in the officer's decision to draw his weapon.

"had been tased and pepper sprayed and was still resisting.  If that doesn't constitute a serious threat I don't know what does."

In what twisted world do you live where resisting constitutes a threat? A threat would be if he was swinging his fists. A serious threat would be if he was brandishing a weapon. He was unarmed, hence, not a serious threat.

"He had an unrestrained pitbull as well, which is also a serious threat that warrants the weapon to be drawn, so there is also that to consider."

Pitbull did not participate in the confrontation until after the weapon was drawn.

"What constitutes a non-deadly confrontation?"

Something quite a bit more than simply resisting arrest. Probably either having an actual WEAPON or outnumbering the officers by 2:1 or better.

"There have been instances where police have been beaten to death by unarmed assailants who were high on drugs, so I am not sure that argument holds much weight."

Again, the drugs are irrelevant in the decision-making process. I'm sure an well-trained athletes could do this as well, which would be easier for an officer to determine during a confrontation than determining if the perp is on drugs. So should it be assumed that athletes constitute a deadly threat as well? Shooting unarmed athletes is justifiable as well? Bullshit on you if you don't think so.

It doesn't take much more than a blunt weapon and a functioning arm. And how many single perps have beaten an officer to death bare handed? Zip? And was the officer's club not functioning? How exactly do you throw punches while you have 10,000 volts ripping through your muscles? I tell you what, if he was well-built and his physique posed a threat, the tazer would have hit him 10 times harder. Big guys fall hard when a tazer is used on them, and they don't get up for a while.

"Also, the report says that Rodriguez scuffled with Crisman while Crisman's weapon was unholstered.  In this case it seems likely that Crisman was afraid that Rodriguez was attempting to take the gun away from him, which is certainly grounds for using deadly-force."

Justifiable. The officer escalated what was but a verbal confrontation by drawing his weapon and pointing it to Rodriguez's head. This is an unjustified show of deadly force. Rodriguez had the legal right to defend himself from this threat as he had shown no aggression.

Do you know the first thing about gun safety? You don't point a firearm at someone unless you believe you may need to use it. Once the firearm is pointed at you it constitutes a grave and immediate threat, no matter who is handling it. You have the right of self defense if you are not an aggressor. Telling the officer that he needs a warrant does not constitute aggression.

Do you really think that the events leading up to the officer drawing his weapon and pointing it at Rodriguez justified the use of deadly force? Everything after that, including that Rodriguez was on meth (coroner's report), is irrelevant to the question.

Hector Maquieira
Hector Maquieira

No, it's a big deal because even the cop's partner had to admit that what Chrisman did was a crime of pure evil.

It doesn't matter that Rodriguez had a criminal record, one the justice system's purpose is to rehabilitate people.

Rodriguez already paid for any crimes he's been convicted of,  he doesn't deserve to get killed because a cop doesn't like it when citizens talk back to him.  

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

 First of all, Virgillio was not his partner, he was another officer who arrived at the scene after Crisman.  Secondly, Virgillio admits that Rodriguez "scuffled" with Crisman before he was shot, that right there indicates a judgment call on the part of the officer (because he very well could have felt as though his life was at risk when Rodriguez fought with him), which provides enough"reasonable doubt" for a jury to acquit.  My guess is that eventually the DA will have no choice but to drop the case because it is simply not a winnable case.

Ebsb52
Ebsb52

Don't be so sure this scum will be convicted. Remember Lovelace of Chandler PD? Not Lovejoy, the Chandler piggy who left his dog in the car to burn up in the summer a couple years back, but Lovelace, the scum with a body count of 2 so far. Lovelace killed the mother of 3 by shooting her in the back as she fled a misdemeanor prescription passing deal, she had a 1 YO child in the back of the car that Lovelace shot into. Anyway, Imbordino was unable to secure a conviction there and he had a geat deal of evidence, witnesses, etc and he's a really good prosecutor too. Juries just aren't big into convicting cops, not to mention they usually get all the motions/evidence their way. Don't forget, Craig Mehrens, a very good defense attny who makes his living defending dirty cops is defending Chrisman as he did Lovelace too. Now to the present with Lovelace, his former Chandler PD buddy, Paul Baboon of Pinal County was elected Sheriff a while back. So what does Lovelace do? He calls him up for a job and gets one as a detention officer. That was 2 years back or so, so in another couple years Lovelace and Baboon can make the case that Lovelace hasn't killed anyone lately, assuming he hasn't, and try to get him back on the force, this time with the Pinal COunty Sheriff's Office. Seeing as how cowardly the AZ Standards Committee was by failing to revoke his certification as they promised they would do, he is able to carry a gun and badge. To all jurors of Lovelace's trial: This next killing is on you, you had the chance to take a killer off the streets and revoke his badge, you failed as did the AZ Police Standards Committee.

But don't be surprised if this scum gets acquitted or a manslaughter conviction and probation.

Guest
Guest

You mean were Nelson tried to run over Lovelace?  And all of the jurors who heard all of the case facts (not some political activistist blather) unanimouslly delivered a case of not-guilty and some jurors even went to testify to get his job back on his behalf because Romley wrongly prosecuted him?  That Lovelace..... hmmm yeah don't think your helping your case.

Janeitian
Janeitian

Waterdogs is obviously a cop defending a fellow blue dumb fool. I say, take this napolean racist off the street and lock him forever. HE HE HE HEHE

DAVEFALLAVOLLITA
DAVEFALLAVOLLITA

I HOPE HE DIES HUNG BY HIS FEET SO I CAN PISS ON HIS FACE

jiazhuangde
jiazhuangde

http://www.findsoso.com (online store)

FOR SALE:---- NFL MLB NBA NHL jersey----------------- shoes------------------ basketball shoes------------------ handbag; wallet----------------- jeans hoody jecket suit------------------- boot------------(the cheapest price ,free shipping and accept paypal payment)more info%u2026%u2026vist this website%u2026%u2026

http://www.findsoso.com

jiazhuangde
jiazhuangde

input this URL:( http://www.findsoso.com )you can find many cheap and high stuff(jor dan shoes)(NBA NFL NHL MLB jersey)( lv handbag)(cha nel wallet)(D&G sunglasses)(ed har dy jacket)(UGG boot)WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENTYOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

Jose
Jose

So much for being innocent before being proven guilty before a court of law. If this officer were black or Hispanic, there would be outrage.

majii
majii

Outrage from whom? I'm black, but I don't uphold a person who has been charged with a crime, or who has been found guilty only because he/she is black. Just as I have never voted for a politician on the basis of race, but on whether I think the politician will do a good job as a public servant for myself and others living in this society.

Not all members of a group are the same, Jose, so it's not a good idea to make general statements saying that you know "this" or "that" would happen because you have no way of knowing what all members of the group would/wouldn't do.

latinavoter
latinavoter

Like it or not we live in a very racist country so it is safe to assume had the cop been of color the whites would be SCREAMING BLOODY MURDER.

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

You are living in a fantasy world. Name the last time "whites" were collectively outraged about some injustice committed by a minority? Wake up, only coddled minorities are the ones who get away with that bullshit.

Native Guns
Native Guns

Actually if Chrisman were a non-White(or female) cop, he already be guilty w/out a fair trial. And yes, there would be a public outrage, asking his/her to be hanged. This is how retrograded the state is. For a non-White and women, you are guilty before proven innocent.

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

Bullshit. If Crisman were anything BUT white this wouldn't have even made the news and certainly no one would being charged with a crime. Read this headline: Police Officer shoots Meth-addict. No one is going to scream "racism" on a story like that. Now read this headline: White Police Officer shoots Hispanic Meth-addict. Now everyone is shouting racism. without even reading the story.

XSoldier
XSoldier

My biggest question is why even issue the preliminary injuction at all? An IA investigation into the situation would have given Public-Safety Manager Jack Harris all the firepower he needed to conduct the Loudermill hearing.

Then again, Harris' own ass is on the line for allegedly cooking the books to win federal grant money for the city of Phoenix.

I do agree that Chrisman should have been given the boot in 2005.

Maybe afterward Chrisman can join the Flaccid Fool's SS hit squad.....

I Hate, Therefore, I Am
I Hate, Therefore, I Am

Officer Richard Chrisman has been fired, discharged, relieved of duty... CANNED !

AND INCARCERATED AND GRAND JURY INDICTED.

To "Waterdogs", "Maxonepercent", and the rest of you neanderfucks out there who seem too confused on how the world is supposed to work... hear this... Chrisman was a fucked up cop who should have never been a cop. He is now where he needs to be.

It matters not whether he is convicted of murder II or acquitted, PPD fired his worthless ass,and that is as it should be.

You idiots might want to stop hatin Mexicans and grow a little self respect.

Final score:

1 dead dog1 dead Chicano1 discharged bad cop1 torn up mobile home1 more blemish on Phx.and1 Hispanic mother, soon to collect a settlement check from the tax payers of Phoenix for$20,000,000.00 -------------- $$$$$$$ Twenty Million Dollars $$$$$$$$

andA state capital that will still be over-burdened with the worst moron population ever accidentedby Nature.

maxonepercent
maxonepercent

Actually, here is how it is far more likely to go down:

1. Crisman will be acquitted (if he is even tried in the first place). The deceased is a known violent criminal with a significant amount of meth in his bloodstream, let's be realistic here.

2. "Hispanic mother" will not win one red dime, her son was committing a crime and was killed after fighting with police.

3. Richard Crisman will sue the City of Phoenix for wrongful termination and win.

4. Richard Crisman will either be rehired by the Phoenix Police Department or he will be hired by another Police force in the city.

Hector Maquieira
Hector Maquieira

What your leaving out is that this time his partner won't back him up... If virgillo is willing to testify that rodriguez was clearly not a threat he will get convicted... Although, there is plenty of time for Virgillo to back out...

USAdefender1
USAdefender1

"night in a Holiday Inn Express"

LOL

USAdefender1

Waterdogs
Waterdogs

I like this part of the story:

"Virgillo told investigators that neither Rodriguez nor the canine posed a threat to either officer."

Oh really...then why did Virgillo fire his TASER if Rodriguez was not a threat??? BOTH Officers fired their TASERS. That's Chrisman and Virgillo.

Don't listen to windbag Lemons. He taints stories all the time.

- Guy is high on meth (proven) in the toxicology report.- His own mom calls PD because she is frightened over the violent behavior of her son.- BOTH Officers fire TASERS in obviously a violent struggle.- Pepper spray is used.- Rumors persist that Virgillo was overcome by the pepper spray and had to flee the trailer.- And the same rumors are that Virgillo is "unsure" if Rodriguez grabbed for Chrisman gun or not which contradicts his original story to investigators on the night of the shooting.

Lemons knows all of this but he just has his panties in a twist for Spencer and accuses PLEA of trashing Virgillo. He ignores Phoenix Vice Mayor Nowlakoski and Councilman Mike Johnson making several phone calls to Virgillo telling him he did the right thing and asking him if he wanted to come by Nowlakoski's own personal home for a BBQ. This upset Virgillo so much he complained to his supervisor.

Where's all of this in Lemons article??? Conveniently left out. And he accuses PLEA of spin??? I guess it takes one to know one...eh Steve :)

Coz
Coz

Bla, Bla, Bla

Coz
Coz

The only high on meth here is you from the sounds of it.

Waterdogs
Waterdogs

I actually agree with "Former Republican." He should have been fired for planting the crack pipe. I totally agree. As for "Coz," - typical kool-aide drinker who likes to ignore the facts and goes off into conspiracy theories. In this very article (10th paragraph down from the top) it states "... though a toxicology report later showed he (Rodriguez) had meth in his system."

But lets ignore that fact and just say that I'm the one "high on meth."

And lets look over the other FACTS that no one wants to discuss here. If Virgillo is an honest cop and as stated in this article ""Virgillo told investigators that neither Rodriguez nor the canine posed a threat to either officer," then why did Virgillo fire his TASER???

Anyone want to answer that one? No night stick, handcuffs, punching the suspect or even wrestling with him...it went right to TASER...by BOTH officers. Yet Virgillo says there was no threat to either officer????? Maybe he just enjoys electrocuting people???

And by the weigh...the non-aggressive pitbull? As I have heard it, the dog weighed in at 45 pounds (minus 2 ounces of lead). Of course when a 45 pound pitbull is confronted with two strangers, a yelling and screaming master who is struggling with officers to avoid his arrest the dog will behave totally complacent and sit in a corner.

According to Coz I'm not surprised the dog didn't take a nap.

Coz, here's some advice...put the kool-aide down, turn off NPR and Radio America, stop reading Steve Lemons, get a job and stop kicking your dog to relieve your frustrations in life and I'm confident you will become a productive, useful American :)

Hector Maquieira
Hector Maquieira

The cops tasered and peppered sprayed Rodriguez.   AFTER THAT, VIRGILLO SAID HE WAS NO LONGER A THREAT.

ONCE YOU TASER AND PEPPER SPRAY SOMEONE AND THEIR ON THE GROUND PARALZED THEN HE IS NO LONGER A THREAT AND IF YOU SHOOT HIM NOW IT IS SECOND DEGREE MURDER.

Johnny White Man
Johnny White Man

I bet on your sister, that traitor Chrisman will be indicted and charged for the heinous crime. I will also say it with confidence that the Law will prevail and Justice served for all those involved.Everybody knows that what Chrisman did was unspeakable and despicable. He shall pay for his atrocity.

We'll see.

Waterdogs
Waterdogs

@Pud Boss - "...I am in no way affiliated with law enforcement," then you state about TASERs, "And they are preferred over "wrestling", "punching" or "using a nightstick."

So your not a cop or affiliated with law enforcement but you know what cops "prefer" when dealing with a violent subject.

Clearly, the answer to how you know this is that you must have spent the night in a Holiday Inn Express :)

Pit Boss
Pit Boss

Waterdummy said:

"And lets look over the other FACTS that no one wants to discuss here. If Virgillo is an honest cop and as stated in this article ""Virgillo told investigators that neither Rodriguez nor the canine posed a threat to either officer," then why did Virgillo fire his TASER???

Anyone want to answer that one?"

Yes, I will answer that and I am in no way affiliated with law enforcement. The kid was high on meth, acting irrationally and they were trying to subdue him. That's what tasers do. And they are preferred over "wrestling", "punching" or "using a nightstick" with the guy for obvious reasons. Do you need me to explain why, too?

Quit trying to rationalize a cop with a Napoleon Complex's behavior. He shot and killed an unarmed man and his dog. He also put a gun to the kid's head when he had the audacity to demand to see a search warrant. The guy's a loose cannon and a murderer.

As to your ignorant statement about the pit bull, most pit bulls are not aggressive towards humans and they typically make shitty guard dogs because of that. I can't blame you for your ignorance there, the media does what it can to demonize the breed so it's not surprising you assume that.

Former Republican
Former Republican

Waterdogs sounds like a corrupt MCSO wanna be. The cop should have been fired way back with the planting of the pipe on a mentally ill woman. How DARE Phoenix PD leave a guy like that on the force? No worries for the fired cop, though. Joe Arpaio likes those beefy thugs in his armed tanks so they can raid homes of suspected cockfighters.What a bunch of pigs. And this cop is a dirty pig.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

General

Home

Loading...