Investigation launched into death of Celtics fan

[winsomme]

as with many of these incidents, i'm not sure that we are ever going to really know what happened, but based on what has been reported so far and having seen things like this handled differently, my opinion is that it was avoidable.

one scenario is that they could have found out who the kid was from his friends who were also apparently drinking......i mean, there are a ton of ways to avoid an incident.

maybe i'm wrong, but that's just the way it seems to me.

  Are you seriously saying that if someone starts running when they're approached by the police that the cops should, instead of pursuing the person and finding out why he's running, just ask his friends who he was and let him go? I think you're deciding how the cops should have proceeded based on your knowledge of why the kid ran. The cops didn't possess that information at the time.

my point is that it was avoidable regardless of who was to blame.

if they saw some illicit activity other than drinking or if they were starting trouble, then the pursuit is different in my mind. but if they were just suspected of drinking, i think it could have been handled differently.

[winsomme]

as with many of these incidents, i'm not sure that we are ever going to really know what happened, but based on what has been reported so far and having seen things like this handled differently, my opinion is that it was avoidable.

one scenario is that they could have found out who the kid was from his friends who were also apparently drinking......i mean, there are a ton of ways to avoid an incident.

maybe i'm wrong, but that's just the way it seems to me.

  Are you seriously saying that if someone starts running when they're approached by the police that the cops should, instead of pursuing the person and finding out why he's running, just ask his friends who he was and let him go? I think you're deciding how the cops should have proceeded based on your knowledge of why the kid ran. The cops didn't possess that information at the time.

Not to mention it goes against everything a police officer is taught from the moment they enter the academy.

But what the hell, we don't need police officers to do the job that they have been trained to do properly. They should think first.

Like that night the officers involved should have thought:

Let's just let those kids over there continue to drink publically, get rip roaring drunk, start fights and tip over cars and throw things through windows and loot stores. Because the last thing we would want to happen is to frighten off a lawbreaker that has an outstanding arrest warrant out, to the point where he runs and then we have to chase him. Who knows he might have a heart condition and while resisting arrest have a coronary and die. We wouldn't want that to happen.

Are you people reading what you are typing?

are you guys really saying that you haven't been around a situation like this where the police quickly diffused it without having to subdue anybody....

like i have been saying, if there was something more that they were doing that was causing a problem, then that's different.

[earl]

are you guys really saying that you haven't been around a situation like this where the police quickly diffused it without having to subdue anybody....

like i have been saying, if there was something more that they were doing that was causing a problem, then that's different.

No, I've been in that exact situation. The cops came up to us and said "hey guys, you can't have those out here, you gotta dump out the beers," and that's the end of it. If the cop came up to us and somebody RAN, be [dang] sure he would have tried to chase him down. From everything here, it seems like the cops approached this group and that one kid took off. You're done right there. You could be completely legal, in the right, no problem at all, but if you RUN, you get away or get nailed.

[KJ33]

Is that Roy Hobbs they attorney speaking?

I have to agree with Winsomme, Unless he is putting someone else in danger on a night like that dump it out and move on.

What was his level of intoxication?  Was he a risk to himself or others?  How was he conducting himself?  What were the other circumstances in the area that night?

These are facts that need to be known to determine whether an arrest was appropriate.  From the very little I've heard on this subject, the kid had a preexisting heart condition, which in all likelihood led to his cardiac arrest.  Sad, to be sure, but I think labeling the officers' conduct as "sickening" is inappropriate until such time as more facts are known.

I understand that people hate the police.  However, I think it's wrong to imply some sort of misconduct without having a factual basis for doing so.  What you and winsomme are doing is blaming the cops for enforcing the law.  Without more facts, I'm not going to condemn the officers for doing their job.

Remember this, you are calling "facts" everything that is attributed to "the police said".  That is not fact either, despite what you are led to believe.  Just like what the media reports is not always true but because of their status, people assume it is, the same goes for the police.   I am not accusing anyone of lying, but you say you are waiting for "more" facts to come in.  The only one you cited that is for sure fact is that he died.  We are conditioned to believe if the police say it, it must be fact, but by virtue of their humanity, that is not always true, they have an incentive to say he ran and resisted given the outcome.

Personally, I think all the police presence and the way they conduct themselves is absurd.  I was at Game 5 of the 2004 ALCS with my 12 yr old son. After that 14 inning marathon that ended with Ortiz' single to drive in Damon, people were understandably in a festive mood, but nothing violent was taking place.  As we attempted to cross the bridge over the Pike to get back to where our car was parked, the police had blocked this way off in the name of crowd control.  As my son and I stood there and tried to figure out an alternate route, not an easy task from there, an officer approached us on foot and in less than kind language told us to get lost.  When I attempted to ask him how I could get to my car without crossing the bridge, he said " I have no idea, but when we release them, pointing at a whole unit of mounted police lined up nearby, you don't want to be here, believe me, they are not going to be asking any questions, so beat it before you get hurt"  Needless to say, I was taken aback by his approach to a Dad and his son, implying that some serious ass kicking was about to commence, not because anyone had done anything, but simply to clear out the crowd from the streets.  My son was noticeably shaken at such behavior by the police and looking to his Dad to solve the problem, ultimately we had to flag a cab to take us the long way around back to our car, it would have taken us hours at 1 a.m. to walk back there.

Needless to say, I was very saddened, but not at all surprised, when after this incident that happened to us I heard about Ms. Snelgrove's untimely death.  The police were so aggressive, before there was any trouble, I had worried about something like that happening, even to my son and I that night as we were trapped in the midst of the crowd surrounded by agitated police, ready to go.  I told everyone at work the next day we were scared something bad was going to happen, and then a few days later, to someone else, it did.  So the city's response is to put full SWAT teams surrounding the Garden upon exiting, creating the fear that if you even yelled "Woohoo!!' too loudly, some kind of action might be taken, as it has in the past.

From the "facts" we can at least ascertain that the police, according to their own report, did try to chase down and arrest this kid who had an open container(they think, they didn't even know that for sure)  I think people know enough from that to form a judgement that they consider this a minor offense that was treated way over the top, it is not a slam to the police to have that opinion.

[nickagneta]

as with many of these incidents, i'm not sure that we are ever going to really know what happened, but based on what has been reported so far and having seen things like this handled differently, my opinion is that it was avoidable.

one scenario is that they could have found out who the kid was from his friends who were also apparently drinking......i mean, there are a ton of ways to avoid an incident.

maybe i'm wrong, but that's just the way it seems to me.

  Are you seriously saying that if someone starts running when they're approached by the police that the cops should, instead of pursuing the person and finding out why he's running, just ask his friends who he was and let him go? I think you're deciding how the cops should have proceeded based on your knowledge of why the kid ran. The cops didn't possess that information at the time.

Not to mention it goes against everything a police officer is taught from the moment they enter the academy.

But what the hell, we don't need police officers to do the job that they have been trained to do properly. They should think first.

Like that night the officers involved should have thought:

Let's just let those kids over there continue to drink publically, get rip roaring drunk, start fights and tip over cars and throw things through windows and loot stores. Because the last thing we would want to happen is to frighten off a lawbreaker that has an outstanding arrest warrant out, to the point where he runs and then we have to chase him. Who knows he might have a heart condition and while resisting arrest have a coronary and die. We wouldn't want that to happen.

Are you people reading what you are typing?

are you guys really saying that you haven't been around a situation like this where the police quickly diffused it without having to subdue anybody....

like i have been saying, if there was something more that they were doing that was causing a problem, then that's different.

winsomme, the kid ditched.

When questioned he took off.

It is a police officer's first instinct and first instructions that when someone runs like he's guilty of something he probably is. Catch him and sort things out after.

I can't understand you insistence that the situation could or should have been handled differently. We now know the kid fled because he had an outstanding warrant out. But the police did not know that. For all they knew, he had possession of firearms, drugs, or other unlawful possessions. He might have been a drug dealer, a wanted murder suspect, any number of things.

Your stance that Monday morning QBing the situation says the cops were wrong is easy to say on Monday. But at that time they did the 100% complete right thing because they had no knowledge of why he ran. Turns out they were right to pursue him, he had an outstanding arrest warrant. It's unfortunate he died but he is more to blame than any other person for what transpired.

If he had an episode while being detained and the officers ignored it until it was too late, then that is what they are at fault for. But the are not at fault for doing the job they are trained to do.

[Roy Hobbs]

What was his level of intoxication?  Was he a risk to himself or others?  How was he conducting himself?  What were the other circumstances in the area that night?

These are facts that need to be known to determine whether an arrest was appropriate.  From the very little I've heard on this subject, the kid had a preexisting heart condition, which in all likelihood led to his cardiac arrest.  Sad, to be sure, but I think labeling the officers' conduct as "sickening" is inappropriate until such time as more facts are known.

I understand that people hate the police.  However, I think it's wrong to imply some sort of misconduct without having a factual basis for doing so.  What you and winsomme are doing is blaming the cops for enforcing the law.  Without more facts, I'm not going to condemn the officers for doing their job.

Remember this, you are calling "facts" everything that is attributed to "the police said".  That is not fact either, despite what you are led to believe.  Just like what the media reports is not always true but because of their status, people assume it is, the same goes for the police.   I am not accusing anyone of lying, but you say you are waiting for "more" facts to come in.  The only one you cited that is for sure fact is that he died.  We are conditioned to believe if the police say it, it must be fact, but by virtue of their humanity, that is not always true, they have an incentive to say he ran and resisted given the outcome.

What did I say in the post above that wasn't a fact?  His *parents* said he had a pre-existing heart condition, that he had received treatment for in the past.  I'm assuming that's a fact.

As for the rest of it, we'll have to wait and see.  From what it looks like, though, the police approached this kid about having an open container.  He resisted in some way.  He was intoxicated at the time.  He was subdued.  Police called EMS for an ambulance for an extremely intoxicated young man.  Six minutes later, the police renewed their call to EMS, this time reporting the kid had stopped breathing.  He was put into a medically induced coma, which he later awoke from, and ultimately died at the hospital.

I think those are all things that can be established by the record, and seem to be supported by interviews with the parents, witnesses, and officers.

I think people know enough from that to form a judgement that they consider this a minor offense that was treated way over the top

Having an open container is a fairly minor offense, although based upon the circumstances, I think it was prudent of the cops to try to eliminate public drinking.  However, fleeing from the cops / resisting arrest is *not* minor, by any stretch of the imagination.

[dark_lord]

Remember this, you are calling "facts" everything that is attributed to "the police said".  That is not fact either, despite what you are led to believe.  Just like what the media reports is not always true but because of their status, people assume it is, the same goes for the police.   I am not accusing anyone of lying, but you say you are waiting for "more" facts to come in.  The only one you cited that is for sure fact is that he died.  We are conditioned to believe if the police say it, it must be fact, but by virtue of their humanity, that is not always true, they have an incentive to say he ran and resisted given the outcome.

this is a great point kj, even tho i think the kid was at fault, based on the "facts" released thus far.

also, sorry to hear that story with u and ur son. as a father, i can imagine how u felt with ur son there feeling anxious and shaken by the officer's response. he should have demonstrated a better image in front of your boy.

[dark_lord]

What did I say in the post above that wasn't a fact?  His *parents* said he had a pre-existing heart condition, that he had received treatment for in the past.  I'm assuming that's a fact.

As for the rest of it, we'll have to wait and see.  From what it looks like, though, the police approached this kid about having an open container.  He resisted in some way.  He was intoxicated at the time.  He was subdued.  Police called EMS for an ambulance for an extremely intoxicated young man.  Six minutes later, the police renewed their call to EMS, this time reporting the kid had stopped breathing.  He was put into a medically induced coma, which he later awoke from, and ultimately died at the hospital.

I think those are all things that can be established by the record, and seem to be supported by interviews with the parents, witnesses, and officers.

another fact was that he had an existing warrant, which was the likely reason for his fleeing

[winsomme]

as with many of these incidents, i'm not sure that we are ever going to really know what happened, but based on what has been reported so far and having seen things like this handled differently, my opinion is that it was avoidable.

one scenario is that they could have found out who the kid was from his friends who were also apparently drinking......i mean, there are a ton of ways to avoid an incident.

maybe i'm wrong, but that's just the way it seems to me.

  Are you seriously saying that if someone starts running when they're approached by the police that the cops should, instead of pursuing the person and finding out why he's running, just ask his friends who he was and let him go? I think you're deciding how the cops should have proceeded based on your knowledge of why the kid ran. The cops didn't possess that information at the time.

Not to mention it goes against everything a police officer is taught from the moment they enter the academy.

But what the hell, we don't need police officers to do the job that they have been trained to do properly. They should think first.

Like that night the officers involved should have thought:

Let's just let those kids over there continue to drink publically, get rip roaring drunk, start fights and tip over cars and throw things through windows and loot stores. Because the last thing we would want to happen is to frighten off a lawbreaker that has an outstanding arrest warrant out, to the point where he runs and then we have to chase him. Who knows he might have a heart condition and while resisting arrest have a coronary and die. We wouldn't want that to happen.

Are you people reading what you are typing?

are you guys really saying that you haven't been around a situation like this where the police quickly diffused it without having to subdue anybody....

like i have been saying, if there was something more that they were doing that was causing a problem, then that's different.

winsomme, the kid ditched.

When questioned he took off.

It is a police officer's first instinct and first instructions that when someone runs like he's guilty of something he probably is. Catch him and sort things out after.

I can't understand you insistence that the situation could or should have been handled differently. We now know the kid fled because he had an outstanding warrant out. But the police did not know that. For all they knew, he had possession of firearms, drugs, or other unlawful possessions. He might have been a drug dealer, a wanted murder suspect, any number of things.

Your stance that Monday morning QBing the situation says the cops were wrong is easy to say on Monday. But at that time they did the 100% complete right thing because they had no knowledge of why he ran. Turns out they were right to pursue him, he had an outstanding arrest warrant. It's unfortunate he died but he is more to blame than any other person for what transpired.

If he had an episode while being detained and the officers ignored it until it was too late, then that is what they are at fault for. But the are not at fault for doing the job they are trained to do.

well, i think they could easily found out who he was from his friends....

and like i said before, if they saw any of that more illicit stuff, then that changes the scenario, but if they are approaching for just the drinking, then you lean on the friends a little and the situation quickly comes into foucs...

that how it seems to me anyway.

[mzpanther]

The important issue here is whether, when apprehended, did the cops use excessive force which resulted in kid's death and/or were the cops negligent by not responding appropriately when the kid stopped breathing under their custody. To me, either case is a plausible scenario that needs to be investigated completely and neither of which has anything to do with fleeing or drinking in public.

The excessive use of force by police officers is a reality in today's society. It happens all too frequently and sometimes results in death. While that may very well not have been the case here, it is reasonable and appropriate to be critical given that the BPD killed one person not all that long ago after a celebration. I take issue with the people here who want to clear the BPD of wrongdoing just because the kid was drinking in public and then fled.

[KJ33]

i mean, unless you are suggesting that every kid suspected of drinking in public that dashes is chased down and arrested, i think you would agree that there is a great deal of discretion involved in handling these situations.....

I think if you flee from the cops, you should be chased.  The police may use discretion in deciding whether to arrest you after that, but they should certainly chase you, assuming that such is reasonably possible, and there isn't another situation that needs their immediate attention.

I don't think all kids with open containers should be detained or arrested.  However, once you flee from the cops after they approach you, you're asking for trouble.

like i said "asking for trouble" and actually "getting trouble" are different things.....

and i have been in the situation to know that it could have gone down differently.....i have enough knucklehead friends to know that bad decisions are made ALL the time. and the police have chosen to acknowledge the stupid behavior for what it was.....heck, many of them have been there...and they can usually tell when there is a public threat or not...

that is why i think it was avoidable.

TP, right on.  Saying everyone who flees in a crowd of thousands should "for sure" be chased down and restrained is a bit naive.  What if they did not chase him and left him to commit another crime later that night?  Like what, having an open container somewhere else in public?  The issue is level of threat and they themselves said they approached only because of a suspicion of an open container, not because of any other threat they posed.  Chasing down a kid with a beer amongst thousands of revelers, to me, is a bit over the top.  It is frightening that someone would want the cops to chase down and subdue anyone who ever runs from their presence, no matter what the circumstance. In this case, him fleeing actually resolved the imminent concern, there were thousands left to focus on after he was gone.  If you enjoy that sort of totalitarian society I would suggest you move somewhere like Singapore.

[Roy Hobbs]

The important issue here is whether, when apprehended, did the cops use excessive force which resulted in kid's death and/or were the cops negligent by not responding appropriately when the kid stopped breathing under their custody. To me, either case is a plausible scenario that needs to be investigated completely and neither of which has anything to do with fleeing or drinking in public.

The excessive use of force by police officers is a reality in today's society. It happens all too frequently and sometimes results in death. While that may very well not have been the case here, it is reasonable and appropriate to be critical given that the BPD killed one person not all that long ago after a celebration. I take issue with the people here who want to clear the BPD of wrongdoing just because the kid was drinking in public and then fled.

I agree with your post except for the part in green.  I don't think it's reasonable or appropriate to presume that the cops did something wrong -- which to me is what is implied by the phrase "be critical" -- because of the fact that they're cops, or because one previous situation was handled properly.  If you're going to heighten one prior bad act to paramount importance (during which the cops reacted completely different than how they did in the present situation), at the very least consider the literally thousands of arrests every year that don't result in incident.

This should be investigated.  Both Internal Affairs and the DA's office have a vested interest in making sure this is handled properly.  Until the facts are known, people shouldn't be either defending or criticizing the cops' actions *from the point of arrest onward*. 

[Roy Hobbs]

TP, right on.  Saying everyone who flees in a crowd of thousands should "for sure" be chased down and restrained is a bit naive.

Didn't you just get on my case for not properly citing facts?  This kid was in a reported crowd of four, not thousands.  He was the only one reported to be running.  Where do you get "flees in a crowd of thousands" from?

It is frightening that someone would want the cops to chase down and subdue anyone who ever runs from their presence, no matter what the circumstance. In this case, him fleeing actually resolved the imminent concern, there were thousands left to focus on after he was gone.  If you enjoy that sort of totalitarian society I would suggest you move somewhere like Singapore.

Did you read the post you quoted?  No?  I didn't think so.

think if you flee from the cops, you should be chased.  The police may use discretion in deciding whether to arrest you after that, but they should certainly chase you, assuming that such is reasonably possible, and there isn't another situation that needs their immediate attention.

I get very frustrated responding to people's arguments who mischaracterize what I've written.  I fail to see what is "totalitarian" about expecting people to not resist arrest when approached by cops, but obviously we're approaching this from completely different mindsets.

I will say that there's a reason that every jurisdiction in the United States allows prosecutors to bring up the fact that a suspect fled from cops as an inference of guilt.

[bdm860]

overall i dont like cops, but i am smart enough to listen and obey to their request.  if i am treated unfairly you deal with it after the incident (court, attorneys, etc), not during it.

the kid was an idiot for drinking in public, not following the request of the officer, then fleeing.

the cops are not responsible in this case with what info has been released thus far.

I think we all know why that is.  It's no secret that Dark Lord's people have constantly been abused by the cops.

[KJ33]

TP, right on.  Saying everyone who flees in a crowd of thousands should "for sure" be chased down and restrained is a bit naive.

Didn't you just get on my case for not properly citing facts?  This kid was in a reported crowd of four, not thousands.  He was the only one reported to be running.  Where do you get "flees in a crowd of thousands" from?

It is frightening that someone would want the cops to chase down and subdue anyone who ever runs from their presence, no matter what the circumstance. In this case, him fleeing actually resolved the imminent concern, there were thousands left to focus on after he was gone.  If you enjoy that sort of totalitarian society I would suggest you move somewhere like Singapore.

Did you read the post you quoted?  No?  I didn't think so.

think if you flee from the cops, you should be chased.  The police may use discretion in deciding whether to arrest you after that, but they should certainly chase you, assuming that such is reasonably possible, and there isn't another situation that needs their immediate attention.

I get very frustrated responding to people's arguments who mischaracterize what I've written.  I fail to see what is "totalitarian" about expecting people to not resist arrest when approached by cops, but obviously we're approaching this from completely different mindsets.

I will say that there's a reason that every jurisdiction in the United States allows prosecutors to bring up the fact that a suspect fled from cops as an inference of guilt.

I agree with you he shouldn't have run, that is never a good idea as many have said.  My reference to the crowd had to do with the fact that there were thousands celebrating after the game.  This kid was in a group of 4, were they on a deserted street with nobody else around and police just happened down this same wayward path and spotted them?  Or were they relatively close to and connected with the crowd of revelers celebrating the championship?

You are right that until more facts come in, we cannot say with any certainty that the police did anything in error.  However, neither can we say they didn't.  Everyone seems to want to support the police automatically because this kid made some obvious errors in judgment.  But this incident didn't occur in a vacuum, there is some history here we have to draw on, to at least wonder about, even if it is premature to say that something did in fact happen negligently.  You are acting like until we know everything, it is impossible to draw some inferences on what might have happened based on historical precedent.  

I have personally witnessed celebratory crowd control as I have shared, as well as some arrests outside this arena, and in these cases I observed the police acting too aggressively in the way they responded, regardless of what they were responding to.  It is not some shot in the dark to think it very possible, without knowing for sure, that the police acted in a very aggressive manner.  We use past behavior all the time in society as a guide in judging a current situation.  It doesn't automatically make it so, but it is reasonable to at least think it possible that the BPD was very aggressive in the way they handled this based on how they have handled previous situations.  In fact, I would say, knowing what we do know about their past behavior, it is more incredulous that they handled this perfectly, treating the kid gently and giving him immediate medical care. They are human also, their adrenaline gets pumping, when someone runs, they take it very personally and are not exactly acting like trained EMTs once they get their hands on someone who has run from them.