Alleged "Spice" User Chokes Out Police Dog While Running From Cops

• Heh, it's amazing how many morons fall for this wives tale. There are no studies that prove that this is the case. Yes, there is a problem with a recidivism rate upwards of 67% but that also means that 23% do not go back to jail and stop being criminals. There are many reasons that the recidivism rate is so high including prison it self has not proven to be a deterrant to crime, prisons are crimnal schools, the usa puts more of its population in jail than most any other country, there is very little actual rehabilitation, so many inprisoned for nonviolent crimes like marijuana possession, which ruins their lives, prevents them from getting jobs and thus leads them back to a life of crime to survive which prison prepares them for. The prison system is a for profit numberd game, the more people that can be put in prison than the more money the prison companies make which allows them to lobby for new laws, longer sentences, less rehab and therefore a continuous line of repeat customers. None of the previous legislative remedies have been proven to lower crime whatsoever. Pull your head out and realize you don't know what you are talking about and that you are acting like a moron esp. Considering that accessing google to find the correct facts are only a few keystrokes away.

• once a felon, always a felon

• Eleanor, Hmmm... you accuse me of being a confused blogger which appears to be a projection on your part. "Projection is the darkroom of the sould in which you devleop your fears." I will expand on why this is. So you are not a christian but a believer in the positive but you advocate that the police shoot a man without a trial. That is quite a negative reaction to what happened so your advocation flies in the face of your beliefs as well as being completely unconstitutional. Do you not believe we should be following the tenets of the constitution? So may speculation of your christianity was incorrect, the fact that your beliefs are incongrous with your advocation is right on. Yes, I am against police brutality because it is unconstitutional but that doesn't stop it from taking place in the mcso or elsewhere. That statement was made as a point that if police acted in a fashion that follows that which you advocate, and it does occur IRL, than it may be the only thing that could possibly shake you from your hypocritcal thinking. So as pointed out, you appear to be the confused one and you project that state of mind onto me. What philosphical stance or stances do you operate from if not christianity, just to be clear since belief in the positive doesn't really describe a philosophical stance very well.?

• Sometimes criticism of local law enforcement occurs here with good reason. Hell, if the feds have been sniffing around for so long something newsworthy and fishy must be going on. Though I am curious as to why you would think that the most popular drug of choice here would be crack? I would guess alcohol, since posters here have admitted imbibing. Then next perhaps marijuana but crack, I just don't see it. You think maybe you are getting to old to be in a position of power when your thinking capabilities, as shown here, are deteriorating? You are obviously a newbie here, your choice of nicks exposed that immediately. I will leave you to the wolves now.

• New to this Blog - is this the area for crack heads to write stupid comments about law enforcement? 

• Good point but it is the first I have heard of anyone attempting such.

• Spice? Nah, I say it was his middle name that messed him up and drove him wild with rage. Have a nice time in the joint, "Renee."

• "at which point he grabbed the dog's collar and attempted to choke him out" "Choke him out?" Who says that? He attempted to choke or strangle the dog. Not an unreasonable move if a dog is trying to devour your arm.

• You couldn't be more wrong when it comes to your perception of me when I say peace and love.  I am a believer in positive not in the Christian views as you so assumed.  As for your statement about what you think a cop should do to me if I get pulled over....really.....didn't you just write a bunch of stuff about police brutality....are you against it or not???  Or are you just a confused blogger?

• A sad and scary sentiment you put forth here boyinblue. You must have some connection to the leo "family" or are some wannabe cop. Since I have been arrested on trumped up charges previously I know why it is important to decry actions such as you fantasize about and support. For any officer to use any more force than unecessary is unconstitutional and putting the officer(s) in the position of judge, jury, and executioner and this is absolutely not their place and illegal. To support such abohorent behavior, no matter what the crime, though I admittedly can understand feeling the desire to physically assault child molesters and rapists, officers still have no standing, judicial power or right to beat a alleged law breaker unnecessarily. Otherwise this leads to a climate where it can happen to those accused but not yet convicted. Say if a neighborhood child accuses you of molesting them because you verbally castigated him for riding his bike on your lawn and ruining it but you are completely innocent but the officers do not yet know this since they haven't checked your alibi that a nieghbor observed the whole incident and no physical contact occured, and the officer went mad with a billy club to your head and body and teeth because he presumed you are guilty because he thought a child would never lie about bsomething like this... then a horrible misscarriage of justice would be perpetrated on an innocent victim. Some of you morons just never seem to think through what you are stating means or is promoting and you just spout off on issues and situations you are wholly ignorant of the negative and unconstitutional issues surounding them.

• The fourth paragraph includes the incorrect " Just because PNT covers illegal immigrant issues from a pro-humanitarian stance doesn't not lead to any conclusion that any other unrelated stance they may have is incorrect." Should be: " Just because PNT covers illegal immigrant issues from a pro-humanitarian stance DOES NOT lead to any conclusion that any other unrelated stance they may have is incorrect."

• Wow, your powers of perception and reading comprehension are so astoundingly underwhelming. Fail 1, the issue the article addresses and is stated quite clearly in the headline is that the person in question was in possesion of Spice and paraphanalia to consume Spice and attempted the odd behavior of choking out a dog in the process of eluding police. Spice does have the ability to chemically influence the brain and cause altered behavior. Thus the logical conclusion that an alleged chemically altered person attempted to choke out a dog while running from the police. All statements of fact related to the person in questions criminal action of attempting to elude the police. The allegation of being under the influence of a mind altering drug possibly influencing his odd behvaior of choking the dog is relevant, at least considering how the courts would look at it. So this definitely ties in his alleged Spice use with the crime committed. Fail 2, that this article's headline remotely approaches "reefer madness" sensationalism and antidrug propaganda of the 30's. Though the headline approaches "news of the weird" porportions in many ways, it is not based on any horribly racist, unsubstantiated propaganda akin to what had driven the "reefer madness" hysteria of the 30's. Though it is highly unlikely that marijuana type drugs like Spice would have any sort of effect that would spur such an action as choking out a dog, so little is known about Spice and its effects that it is a possibility it did have an influence on the situation. The key in this is that the person in question was allegedly under the influence of mind altering chemicals and that is a distinct possibility considering the circumstances. Fail 3, that Phoenix New Times utilizes unethical journalism because it is a pro-illegal tabloid. This is a logical fallacy. Just because PNT covers illegal immigrant issues from a pro-humanitarian stance doesn't not lead to any conclusion that any other unrelated stance they may have is incorrect. It may lead readers to believe that PNT's editorial bent may lean towards issues that are held by liberals but nothing more and it is still irrelavent to the debate at hand since this still would be a logically fallacious route to pursue. Win 1, your only truthful statement in all this is that the douche is where he belongs... in jail. But that is so obvious it hardly supports making a point of it.

• His behavior has nothing to do with "Spice". The headline is sensationalist crap akin to "reefer madness" propaganda of the 30s. Not that I would expect anything remotely resembling ethical journalism from a pro-illegal tabloid like the New Times. That said this douche is where he belongs. In jail.

• Peace and love... I bet you are what would be called a god lovin' christian who supposedly follows the bible but in day to day living do not. You obviously have no clue about many things including the constitution. The wild west justice you suggest is unconstitutional and unchristian like. You should be ashamed of your self and I hope when a corrupt cop pulls you over he forces you to perform sexual favors on him... than maybe, just maybe you will get a clue and dispense with making such ridiculous antiamerican statements such as you have.

• I made a mistake... in the beginning of my post, a portion of my first statement ends with "the active ingrediant in spice.com" When it should read: "... the active ingredient in marijuana."

• Many in the legal profession agree with me, so your sophmoric blowoff is just that. I have to remember you are one of them, those that vow to protect and serve but expect the public to kiss your ass even if you are rude to us from the get go. This isn't any different than the denial you are in over the inclusive us vs them law enforcement "family" you belong to that fosters bigotry from the top down. Why don't you post some of those rascist cartoons that are floating around the mcso intranet? Ahh, I am sure as you dismiss the above claim of mine you will this one as well. What happened to those that sent or passed around racist cartoons previously yps? Were they removed from the force? I doubt it and if they were disciplined I doubt the public would hear about it because your "family" keeps such things quiet. The prevalency of you protecting your own and investigating your own for crimes doesn't always work because of the preferential treatment the "family" gives to its members who are not held to the same standards as the general public when it comes to internal investigations. The additional charges are a part of what has lead to arizona having more incarcerated citizens in its prisons than any other state. Has this lead to a drop in crime as your "family" suggests? No, those that study the prison systems and recidivism have shown that arizonas drop in crime is a national trend and is happening in many other states without such prosecutorial tactics. Not allowing inmates to serve their seperate sentences together, which is a travesty because in actuality there was one action not whatever number of seperate crimes the defendant is charged with but each crime the defendant is charged with gets treated as seperate actions and the guilty then have to serve a 200 year sentence rather than a 40 year sentence for such things as the sale of a single joint, which has happened. Mandatory sentencing is a legislative tactic that doesn't reduce crime and leads to sentences that are not fair to the defendant and can often become life sentences (which is cruel and unusual punishment in many situations) and these tactics have been shown not to reduce crime but lead to over crowded jails and costing taxpayers a fortune plus are actually more harmful to society than discretionary sentencing for nonviolent crimes. The addition of multiple charges to an illegal action is a subset of this situation. Read the recent media reports on how arizona incarcerates more citizens than any other state. The way arizona has set up its judicial system is going to cost us more in the future than alternative sentencing. But you just keep up with that denial, it is what keeps you dysfunctional and unable to perceive what is going on right under your nose. As a student of law I see clearly how adding additional charges to one criminal action is used by the prosecution. Part of being a lawyer requires perceiving such tactics and seeing through what they look like on the surface to what actually takes place. I have read and heard stories from people I know that are completely innocent but can't afford a good lawyer to fight the mulitiple charges and it can be less than a 50/50 gamble going with an inexperienced public defender against a experienced and well seasoned prosecution. If the defendents choice is pleading down to two years in jail or risking going down for 10-20 years by going to trial with a public defender, I might take the two years rather than risking even more of ny life in prison... hell that's a gamble that isn't worth betting on because the odds suck. These kinds of situations happen daily in the halls of justice in arizona and elsewhere, it just particularly worse here. Read the following if you think others in the legal field don't agree with me: http://law.jrank.org/pages/9227/Plea-Bargaining-Plea-Bargaining-Shortcut-Justice.html

• The chemicals that were made illegal were analogues or chemicals that had a similar chemical structure to thc, the active ingrediant in Spice. They can in many cases produce similar effects as marijuana, see New Times own set of articles on this subject for more info on this. The problem now is no one knows what chemicals they use now if any. Many sheister companies are selling spice incense that is legal but doesn't have any additional chemicals so it doesn't do anything but burn your throat and cost a lot of money... these new spice wholesalers are counting on the publics ignorance of what they are buying and they basically have been dealt a bait and switch. Yes it is not natural but depending on the person, very similar effects can be had with jwh-200 or whichever number it was.

• Charles Cobbs you always make a fool out of your self.  That's ok, you keep try on proving how smart you are. Your baby mama might be impressed but I'm not. Peace and love to you.

• Hi Eleanor, I would prefer it if you did not read my articles. You are a fool and I hate your ass. I wish you would just go away because you are stupid. Mr. King

• There goes thirty seconds of my life I will never get back.

• Wow Mr King, I didn't realize there were so many assholes who read your blog and don't have a clue about so many things.  I was very distracted today or I would have replied to each on individually.  My guess is the guy who calls himself "I did Eleanor in the Ass" is probably Charles Cobbs or one of Tommy Ryff's boyfriends. 

• Nice name.  I hope she liked it because from what I have hear you are barely  big enough to get past the ass crack.  No the cops shouldn't just shoot they guy because he is abusing the dog.  The dog was doing what he was taught to do.  If the person doesn't fight back the dog is called off.  If you had a clue about police work you might know this. This asshole, which you can barely reach too from what I hear, was on a synthetic drug that made him more out of control.  You don't necessarily have to shoot him with a gun....there are various non lethal things to shoot the fucker with.  If you want to talk shit go right ahead but a least have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about.  As for the rest of you people who said negative comments regarding what I said the same goes for you.  Have a clue about police work before you talk shit and make assumptions about what I mean. 

• Why wasn't that cop from Chandler charged with "attempt to kill or harm a service animal" when he left the poor dog in the car in 115 heat for 8 hours?

• I like it. If they use a dog for violence, the dog deserves all the violence it gets it return.  

• Eleanor, it sounds like you are pro-P0-Po brutality. You are known to bash arpaio, granted. But this latest comment from you, makes it seems that you are now for an extreme police state. "Hard Hand Fists"  is good enough, to stop that low life criminal from the choking the life out of that service animal. Are you really suggesting that cops should shoot everyone who wish not to be chewed to death?

• I'd pay to see the video of the cop getting kicked in the balls...don't suppose that will be on Cops any time soon, eh?

• "When police searched the vehicle Oliva was driving they found a bong filled with 'Spice,' a synthetic form of marijuana." It's bad enough when the mainstream press makes these types of claims.  spice is nothing like cannabis, it's a chemical sprayed on a plant.  the effects are nothing alike and it's not natural. these myths give cannabis a bad name

• Spare me.

• Any "Man Bites Dog" story is great in my book.

• Don't you realize that when the police turn their dogs on you, you are supposed to lie there calmly and let the dog gnaw on your arm, leg, or whatever? Do you remember a few years back whena police canine jumped out of the squad car and attacked a female who just happened to be jogging in her own neighborhood? Folks were very upset when she went to court and had the animal destroyed. 

• Ha Ha!  Choke that fucking police dog out!  I wish he would have killed the fucking dog

• It is ridiculous that possessing a bong is illegal but I am sure there is a statute against it in arizona. They would likely charge him with possession if they found marijuana resin in the bong later. These sorts of laws that get tagged on to the main charge are used by prosecuters as another chip to play against defendants when plea bargaining. This allows them to have something extra to drop if the defendant pleas out and favors the prosecution because the defendant still goes to jail on the main charge and this looks good in the media. Plea deals are cheaper for the county/state, make the defendant look guilty, it looks like a win for the prosecuter, as well as makes the prosecuter look tough on crime since he doesn't have to plead down the main charge. It's dirty lawering in my book, and leads to defendants pleading out because they can't afford the money for a good lawyer (public defenders are often wet behind the ears and often do not do as well as a paid lawyer when going against a seasoned prosecuter), they gamble on receiving a guilty and stiffer sentence if they go to trial, puts the defendant in a bad position since the prosecuter, public defenders and the judge prefer to settle without a trial in most cases. As far as the illegality of Spice... if it contains anyone of three emergency scheduled synthetic drugs it is illegal but if it doesn't have any of the three illegal chemicals than it is legal. Also having a bong in possession with Spice prevents a defendant from pleading that they only utilized the Spice as incense and may be evidence of consumption and therefore being under the influence of a drug illegal or not. Also, the county or state can wring more money out of defendants as you point out. It's a tactic that came out of the "get tough on crime" years in the 80's if I recall correctly.

• Well done Vito.  Thanks for giving our bboyzz in blue some stick time.  Love it--only sad part is tht both of your eyes are not black and you still have yor front teeth. 

• The cop assumed the risk when he went to cop school - I doubt the dog had a choice.

• I'snt spice legal? And also isnt the bong legal? Why are they tacking on another charge? He deserves to get hammered for the rest though. But I hate how they tack all sorts of shit to everyones sentence like they are looking to throw the book at anyone regardless of what happened. I guess they get to wring more money out if they do that.

• Another pathetic criminal off the streets.

• Of course animals are more important than humans. Its ok if cops die, as long as the damn dog lives??? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

• I'm glad this reckless idiot is off the streets. This guy is one stupid fool.First of all, he smokes this "spice" garbage & then goes out & puts innocent citizens in peril with his stupid antics.Throw the book at this asshole, society is safer with him locked up. I just hope the dog is ok.Sounds like something that some Nazi-hugging,corrupt,criminal,election rigging politician's son might do.

• It's bad enough he assaulted the human cop but the dog too.  He should have been shot for that.

TotalComments: 39