Fresno Famous

I should have know better and suspected you would have a pedicab driver waiting to run me over.

They have Garlic Sausage at Grizzlies too!

Wooooooooooooooof!
(Blows Garlic and watches flowers wilt)

The student who died in this incident was 17 years old. Last I checked, students can legally drop out once they reach 16, so there must have been something else keeping him there. And while I agree that it is unfortunate for the students who want to learn to have to deal with so many others who are just there because they have to be, I don't see how denying anyone an education will help to decrease criminal activity. But then, I am one of those *crazies* that likes the idea of culture and tolerance in school.

'...maybe if someone might have seen something that culd have prevented all this..'

-that's the thrust of my comments on this whole thing.

Looking up the behaviors of some (I was re-reading them last night while posting a letter to the issue on MindHub,)

I found that the med Geodon (which the young man was reported to be on,) has a bit of a checkered past, with people who have been on it, and then gotten off of it, (or worse, not known what to do and who are unable to go off of it,) ---and how their own personal experiences include rage issues, sleep disturbance, fantasy about committing extreme acts of violence on family members, --and one person who wanted off the med, was not allowed to do so, and wound up killing two neighbors, and then themselves.
---This information is on the one string in particular from as far back as 2004.
(It's also a national string 'headed up,' by doctors and contributed to by patients.)

It's not a simple math situation, but if you look up what happened to the Roosevelt assailant, and then read the comments posted by those who do not like this med, you can see a pretty obvious link.
-The question is:
-were their behaviors like this (before) the med, --and the med simply did not work?
-or, where their behaviors not really this way, -and the med 'gelled,' something in them, and sparked their behaviors.

By the writings of those who went on, and then were able to get off of Geodon, the concerns of rage, violent outbursts, desires to commit violence against family, (etc.) are NEW and scared the hell out of them.
(some of them had been working with mood-stablizers, anti-depressants, anti-psychotics for years.)

(Responding to Diablo):

Well, like I said, I was talking legal, where you are completely innocent or guilty (to varying degrees). There's no gray area.

I was taking umbrage at the the fact that in the first hour of this story breaking, there was a torrent of cop bashing in the user comments over at the Fresno Bee site, and it made my blood boil. When I saw this article, I probably read some tinge of anti-cop sentiment in it that wasn't there, and I responded. So I'm sorry if I was out of line.

If one wanted to get into the moral/ethical debate, then we are all guilty of taking his life, as we have all entered into a social contract and elected people to represent our interests who appointed officer Perry to that post where he ended up killing his assailant with a weapon that our representatives approved. You or I didn't pull the trigger, but unless you were protesting outside the school lately about armed police officers on campus, we share the guilt in that sense. I know I wasn't, and since police with guns on campus seems to be a surprise to you, seems like you weren't either. But like I said earlier, I don't want to go down that slippery slope. It all depends how one spins it.

Having said all that, I understand where you are coming from now. And for the record, I do feel badly for everyone effected by this. I'm sure Jesse Carrizales will not be the last victim with a disorder to be failed by his treatment. I hope the family will be able to pull a positive out of this tragedy, maybe just a heightened awareness of the problem. Maybe if someone might have seen something that could have prevented all this.

You get clubbed in the head with a baseball bat (happens to us everyday!) perhaps you are affected by this. Makes you a little loopy, if you're not KO'd. I'd consider this someone trying to kill me and do what I have to survive, not necessarily subdue my assailant or get to my cell phone to say I'll be home late for dinner.

That's all.

It was interesting that the first implication by claiming innocence then, is that there was misconduct and/or innocence of that misconduct. My point was more simple, guilty of taking a life.

Like I said, if that's how things are, that's how things are these days.

Just saying a stray bullet can kill, a stray tazer cannot. Not to mention there was two chances to go for a tazer. The tazer having been knocked away first, well then there's the gun, since that's how things are these days. That was my point in stating that training seems to involve shooting, rather, focused on shooting.

I'm not trying to be argumentative. Just talking about this, you know? Devil's advocate, looking at all the angles (Diablo).

This just sucks through and through. We were left with a worste case scenario actually happening. Kind of monday morning quaterbacking sundays game, like ootv said. This is when learning happens. I think OOTV pointed out solid points, and I'm just shaking my head at using a gun in a school.

Diablo

Re: Officer Perry's Innocence:

What do you think he is guilty of, then? If you're saying he's not innocent, then he must be guilty. So of what are you saying he's guilty? I've read about tazers killing people, and I've heard of them not having any effect. He was knocked to the ground. What if his tazer was knocked away from him?

If the family sues the PD, I think Perry will be found not guilty of any misconduct.

If you mean innocent in some other context other than legal, well, that's not a discussion I will be drawn into.

with anything such as this, there is going to be a lot of monday morning quarterbacking and secondary diagnosis.

I can't speak for others, (in fact, considering some of the others who have spoken, I think letting them say what they say is clear enough.)

Looking at this clinically, I see two things that really raise a concern.

-This was a person who was on medical treatment and had had incidents before (incident meaning: behavioral difficulties and obvious anger/depression problems.)

-One of the meds listed (Geodon,) having checked it in some of the online discussion forums among Geodon users,
---has a reputed history of bringing up worse behaviors, (as well as quelling others.)
--considering that one of the people who did not like the side effects of the med, wanted off of it, was not allowed off of it, and then went on to kill others, then himself?
THAT bares looking into.

I'll be honest in saying that it's a hard line to find in terms of 'personal responsibility' when an individual who is on medication for emotional distress or illness does outlandish things (especially with a med that has had side effects that can cause a set up for the situation that just unfortunately unfolded at Roosevelt.)

Going forward?

I'd hope that if anyone is on this med, or is taking it with any other meds, or is on ANY med --and is noticing their behaviors growing worse (instead of better,) that they'd be able to speak to somebody who could find a solution.
--I have no doubt that the doctor(s) handling the med regimine for this young man is/are capable.

There are a lot of variables (diet, lack of sleep, involvement of other substances, personal life issues, (etc.) that could have all played into what happened.

IF this is a situation where there is a tracable and pattered behavioral spike by those who are on this med? I hope that those prescribing it will make other choices.

-that the med is being used (apparently,) as an alternate to zyprexa (which is very heavily used by a lot of folks,) the potential for further problems and situations not unlike this is most definitely there, and could grow.

That needs to be looked into.

The tragedy of it is, somebody lost a brother, a son, a friend,a nephew, a grandson, (etc.) --and they aren't coming back, AND they went out obviously in a lot of mental pain ---all the while being under care for help.

That means others are in pain too.
The doctor and casworkers who were trying to help the kid
AND
The officer who had to make that choice.

Nobody in uniform wants to have to hurt somebody, nobody wakes up saying '...yeah, feel like shooting somebody today.'
--especially when it comes to dropping a kid.

It's hard enough having to live down decisions and actions that have hurt others, (or NOT taking the right measures in a timely sense that could have averted tragedy.)
I can't imagine the weight of having to know that I had to terminate another person's life. (kid or no.)

I hope that the investigations in this yeild results and insight that may help others who are (potentially) at risk due to the same methods being used (I'm speaking of possible medical issues here exascerbated by this med in these situations, NOT, '...did the cop do the right thing, was this a good cop or not, was this kid a saint or a devil.'

The kid is dead, why he wanted to do what he did, and what lead up to that behaviors needs to be understood and shared.
Thankfully more kids aren't dead, and thankfully the officer survived the attack.

This is an opportunity for Fresno (as a medical and social services community,) to take the ball here, do some research, and maybe save a lot more lives, --and relieve a lot of people their agony, IF there is a documentable medical concern here.
-Hopefully it can see past some of the more prurient and petty arguments and assertions and seek to bring on a better understanding of this unfortunate event.

One final thought on this, though it's not at all the last one, (and it is in fact the first one,)
My heart does break for these people, and, as the situation has rolled out (facts revealed, Andy, especially thanks for the heads up on two of the meds allegedly involved,)
I want to make it clear that myself and a lot of family and friends are praying for this officer, the young man's family, and the situation in general.

This is not going to be an easy time for them, and it probably never will be.

-Eric

One of the aspects of having to use a weapon on a person is: you have to make a series of decisions in split second timing to determine what is best for the situation at hand.

-This was a person of significant size who had a weapon (bat,) who had already administered deadly impact to the back of the head of the officer, after lying in wait.

-This was also a person who was clearly in a 'rage state,' and (for whatever reasons,) was acting in a very profound and violent manner, which, when presented? means that you are dealing with someone who is acting and thinking more like a locomotive than a rational person.
This was not an individual who was just 'pissed off.'
They were in a semi-medicated state while being enraged, and dealing with 'that,' is way more difficult than dealing with someone who is simply irate.

-That there was already a weapon involved, that it was on an anniversary date of another mass homocide no doubt colored the situaiton.

-That the officer had already been hit in the head (which could have killed him,) no doubt had a profound impact on his decision making, and put him clearly in a survival mode (IE: it's either me or this guy, -and he's already injured me with intent to kill.')
---That coupled with the knowledge that there were potentially other victims waiting to happen (so now the officer is thinking 'HE's already tried to kill me, he could take my gun and start shooting others, and he is still in a rage state,'
--definitely pushes the situaiton into one where use of deadly force is more of a logical choice.

--A lot of it has to do with environments as well.

I've had people this big and bigger come after me with weapons of this nature, (as well as more than one, at once do such,)
--but the differences were when I was in an environment where it was understood that the people were not well, mentally, and I was trained and there specifically to calm the person down, -and was there to be a part of that person's treatment.
It's a different mindset where you're thinking more in terms of patients best care than defence of self.
(when I was a uniformed officer, licensed to carry weapons and use them if necessary?
-the end result and method (though we wanted everyone to come out of it unharmed,) was different in focus and method than when I am working with deescalating and deactivating a person who is mentally ill in a 'controlled,' or theraputic setting.

---It didn't change the fact that when you have a fire extinguisher coming at your head, or a knife, chair, or enraged person who knows how to hurt you,
---that you are possibly going to be injured or killed.

I've been injured, most anyone who has worked in this genre has been injured, in fact,
(one of my colleagues was put in a wheelchair for life by a kid who weighed a fifty pounds less than this kid, who had 'fragile X' and a rage disorder who went off.)
-Even with us, we did not work with these people in isolated situations, and did not work singley with them but worked with other staff, --and still you can get seriously injured.
WE, however, understood the risks, and understood that we were there to prevent injury of the individual, others, and ourselves, ---but that we were probably going to be in harms way during the process, (but again, we were in a theraputic setting.)

As an officer, you don't really have that focus nor restriction (and often) luxury.

The reality of the officers situaiton is:
When you are in a public setting, and you are there (not) part of hospital staff, it is not a controlled environment, you have to look at the situation from a much quicker and definite vantage point and you don't have as many options:

This is a large person who has already gone into a rage, has already attacked (the officer,) with a weapon, ---and who is not slowing down.

Would a 'tazer,' have been just as effective?
Maybe.
But a tazer is not as 'effective' as a firearm when it comes to shutting down an attacker,
(which was the situation presented:
'I'm an officer already with a headwound from this guy who tried to kill me, He's not slowing down, He's trying again, there are a lot of kids here who he (likely,) will turn on next, he's huge, and I need to shut this down right now.'

The officer was already in a 'defence,' mode by virtue of his injuries, and through no fault of his own.
Though I'd call his thought processes 'sharpened,' and 'specific,' --I don't think I'd call them 'clouded,' nor 'impared.' (...not saying that you or anyone else has, btw.)

It's just, with options that limited and in a time of crisis You don't think in terms of 'tazer,' at that point, you think in terms of self-preservation (which he was fortunately given the second chance to do,) ---as well as the preservation of a lot of innocent kids.

Regrettably, this person had presented themself as a human weapon that was bent on destruction of others, had just almost succeeded in doing such, --and who stated that they specifically wanted to die,
(which, though it is not a request you fullfill like 'okay then, die,'
---you have to realize that their goal of injuring or killing others cannot be challanged nor thwarted by even appealing their own desire for self-preservation they have made a commitment to injure and destroy, ---as well as to die in the process, and have stated and are acting in that.
---so it is extremely hard to reason with them in that state.

A person (publically, not in a theraputic nor hospital setting,) presents themself as that focussed, and is acting within it, (with no signs of decreasing,)
-presents themself specifically, and has to be responded to specifically.
-Do you want to spare their life, as well as the life of others? Yes, absolutely.
--But if it's a matter of sparing their life, or sparing ones own, as well as sparing those of a lot of innocents, the choice is pretty limited.

If the officer had been knocked unconcious, or killed, and his weapon(s) used on the school? it could have gone from one person dead (the assailant,)
to that person dead (after,) emptying the magazines of the guns, which could have been (theoretically,) a body per bullet.
-If we're talking a weapon with ten bullets in the magazine, and he gets in two good shots per student? That's at least 5 dead, or it could be a higher figure with more dead, and the balance seriously injured.

Along with their own life being protected,
I'm sure that THAT was what the officer was thinking, and had to make a choice of which way to go in a split second,
-(after,) having been nailed in the back of the head with a bat.

Though I've not had to make decisions of that gravity,(life or death,)
I have had to make fast ones (even while injured,) when others and myself are at risk, and have had to choose which methods to use to deactivate the situation, (actually having a 'choice,' is a luxury, most of the time, things happen so fast that you really have no choice and have to work with what has been handed you.
The 'perfect' answer and outcome did not, do not, and will not always happen.

I think, all things considered, this was the best that could have happened, but the end results still are awful.
Its' a matter of there being not more 'awful.'
But it's still awful.

my issue is with the use of a gun. And, fine, if that's the state of affairs these days, then fine, shoot away. (edited for poor sarcasm) Then I don't understand how things are these days, and I'm behind the times.

After talking with a lawyer, one statement he made was that the police seem to be trained very well to shoot. Did this officer have a tazer? I have seen large people well over 300# drop and flop like fish after being hit by a tazer. At what point was there not an option to use a tazer?

In the middle of lunch. Many kids all around. What if the officer missed? What if some innocent bystander child was hit, and killed?

My point is that there are options other than shooting to kill.

Just so I'm clear, I don't have a problem with the officer defending himself, or even that he felt he had to use his gun. No problem there. No problem with the fact he killed the attacker.

One of the original statements was that he was innocent. Innocent of what? What is in question? The fact is that he killed a kid. Justifiably too. But the kid doesn't get to appeal, judge, jury and executioner was a single action trigger pull.

Diablo

I was surprised they actually respected him.
Even the screw ups said he gave kids a second chance.
They respect him too.
Nice to know there is a good cop still around.

Orange Bear.. SSI is not for life. You are reviewed generally every 3-5 years. Just because you get approved for it once,doesn't mean you have it for life. Same with medicare benefits, you are not eligible for medicare until you have been on SSI for 2 years. And you still have to pay for Medicare coverage.

okay, fine, while we're all worrying about OB's biggoted prattle...

--what is being said about the assailants medical history, including his time being on the medication Geodon?

(look up at the post just after Andy's from last night, I found and posted a string link to a lot of patients and patients parents that had reported extremely exascerbated behaviors, -including homocide/suicide while on the med and having increased 'rage,' issues.

Further, if it is a sort of drug interraction that is happening, (where the combination is causing behavioral changes, sometimes quite radical,)
---there are probably a lot of people (kids included,) that are walking around taking this same combination, who may be wrestling with behaviors that they didn't have to that severity before.
(So that means a lot of folks who think that they're okay, or hanging in there, ---who may be suffering with this thinking '...well, that's just how this goes.'

--has anyone thought to see what was up with that?

As this med is being used as an alternative to Zyprexa, and as Zyprexa is being used by a lot of patients of this description (ergo: a lot of them are going to be swung over to Geodon,)
--This could be a further concern with patients who match this make up who suffer from BiPolar/Rage/Depression issues.

This could be a very destructive pattern,) (again, review the 'experiences' thread I put the link to.)

--anybody got anything on that?
--anything being said about that in the media?

They need to go through proper Police channels.

Thanks for correcting my Grammar.
(Tilts head listens to wings flapping)

It's not visiting, its tabloid press and they know that.

Just like Fresno Unified knew this thug/mental case should not have been allowed on any school ground because of his past history.

Fresno Unified knew he was violent.

Yet this threat to students and staff was still allowed.

Why doesn't the Fresno Bee get a comment for Mr "Overpaid" Hanson?

So tell us is the Fresno Bee investigating the criminal records of his siblings and family?

This issue is not going away because the people of Fresno will not let the criminals make this criminal Saint Jesse

Patron Saint of Cop Beaters.

They keep trying to glorify this thug.

Someone has to be the voice of reason. That and you responded before I could. But you said it perfectly, they are trying to interview the officer as he is part of the story. I imagine that the Bee is doing the same with the victim's family but OB probably neglected to say that so he can make it look like the liberal media is siding with the victim's family. Not once have I heard the officer blamed and yet he says everyone is blaming the officer. OB you really need to start showing some facts. And not Marla-esque ones either.

first, leeches is a word with an "es" plural. i know that i type without proper capitalization, but maybe we can all make more effort to spell things correctly, use proper punctuation, and mix in some more civility. those things all make online discussion more enjoyable to take part in.

second, i imagine that if reporters for the bee are visiting the officer involved, they are pursuing the story, something which journalists try to do. i assume, that since the motto of journalism is to report unbiased facts (even if i think this is stated and rarely followed) that they will also interview the family and ask some of these questions.

third, i can't believe i'm commenting on this thread again. i'm really disappointed by the hateful tone it's taken, and really haven't wanted to participate further. yet, here i am.

Leave the man alone.

The Bee's leechs should be all over the parents.

This is not this "innocent childs" first encounter with the law.

There was an inncident last year at Sequoia where he had a knife.

Ask the mother why in the past she called the police on her son.

Make her tell us the truth instead of playing the poor hurt victim.

I'm curious OB, if the kid was white who would you blame then? You really need to learn to see past the color of someone's skin. This ain't 1950.

OB,
Whether you are literally a real person with these bizarre, degrading, depraved, and violent views of others,
--or just somebody's composite literary sock puppet written in online character?,
there is an actual mind behind it, and I hope you are under a doctors care.
(I am not kidding.)

Regarding 'blaming the cop.'

Find one part of all of my writings where I'm blaming a cop. (any cop,) in this.

In fact, if you could read past your own warped agenda and slurs, you will find that what could be a major contributor to this situation
-is a severely negative side effect of (what might have been,) the medication this person was taking.

Now,
I'll be honest with you.
--You yourself could be somebody's patient.
Hell, you could be somebody's doctor,
(though it's not normative, I've known some professionals that have had views as screwed up as yours.)

--but
It is entirely possible that the regimine of medications that you, or anyone else could be on,
--could have (through no fault of the patient,) set up same said patient for more severe behaviors,
---simply by chemical reaction,
(all under the initial well meaninged attempt to see the patient do better.)

psych. meds are not like other meds.
They take time to ramp up, need to be closely monitored, often are severely effected by what a person eats, drinks, and many other day in - day out human body chemistry behaviors.
And they often behave differently with different people.
(It's not an exact science, --and certainly is not an exact science in an adolescent young man.)

Wheras you look to (pretty much any) situation with 'gee, lets see who's to blame' in this, and play your one guitar string (be it races, gangs, (whatever,)
--what you're missing?

is the fact that, even though this person attacked an officer, and was asking to be killed?

--They were taking medication for their emotional problems and
(if you'd read the link I posted,)
OTHERS of similar age, gender, (etc.) found that at least one of the meds this person was on (Geodon) was causing severely violent reactions,
in one case, a situation where a patient who was on it killed at least three other people, then themself.

-Are there a lot of variables to this? Sure.

But there are also a lot of very close similarities that I happened to bump into within fifteen minutes of finding out two of the meds this kid had been on.

Now, here's the deal.

I don't like what you write.
(I really don't, I think your views are dangerous, twisted, and pretty much everything bad I've ever found in this area rolled into one.
The kind of garbage that express on a regular basis typifies the worst perspectives that I think perpetually sculpt this area into being a complete hell-hole when it comes to any sort of community or social well being.)

--but that's okay.
It's just my opinion,
I'm sure you have many other people here in town, and in your life that think your views are just wunnerful.

But here's the REAL catch.
--Whether I like you or your views or not,
has NOTHING to do with your reasons or mental health that causes you to write the hellish garbage that you do.
NOR does it have anything to do with my wanting to see someone who is mentally ill, get best care.

--Based upon your writings?
You very well could have untreated mental illness.
--Based upon your writings?
You even could have mental illness that is under a physicians care (which, I seriously hope is the case.)

Now, regardless of whether I like what you say and do, or not?
My Biggest concern?

--If you are under somebody's care,
your best treatment is what is DEMANDED,

-That best treatment (medically,) means that the meds prescribed need to interract positively and bring on relief and balance for your personal state.
-Which (in a greater sense,) is what I'd want for anyone.

--If you are a person under a doctors care, ANY ethical and reasonable society, or community (which definitely includes police officers, med. personell, etc.) needs to understand that you are wrestling with your demons and are seeking the best help available.
--That means that you are not seen as
'some violent criminal who functions in logic and reason,'
---but somebody who has major issues, and that those issues need to be considered if/when/ if ever you really go off the deep end and start acting out (physically,) your violent views.
(It also takes into consideration that your rational state is seriously impared, so really, a professional cannot appeal nor reason with a person who is thus impared, --and has to work with them differently.)

-IF
You are taking a medication, and that is under a doctors care
-IF -you are under a physicians care, and following their orders,
AND
-you are having severe behaviors (either 'still,' or greatly increased (such as rages etc.) --and that is not addressed by same said physician?
I cannot view your actions to be purely your own fault.
It has to be seriously considered that a lot of your behaviors may be created by the same med-load that you are taking 'trying to be well.'
(Read that correctly.)

THAT is what is so interesting to me in this.
Yes, I feel bad that people died, and seriously wish this could have gone another way, but it didn't.

What I find most interesting in this, with the revelation that this guy was on Geodon (which others had found caused severe behaviors,) I think needs to be looked into.

This would be out of the same fairness that should exist for anyone, (regardless of how many siblings they have, what race they are, how rich or poor they are, or whether I like them as people or not.)

Do I think another 'columbine' 'Va. Tech' situation was avoided?
I don't know.
It's possible, ---but with no notes nor clear indicators (notes, comments, previous behaviors (etc.) that leave a 'paper trail,' of intent, ---nobody can really say.

The Va. Tech shooter had been struggling with mental illness for some time, and there had been several clear incidents prior to his behaviors where others had registered concern, and he left a major major paper and media trail, (and had been speaking and writing out his views on others for quite some time, they were available for view for a while, and were really damning of others, you should read them sometime.)

-what meds he was on (if any,) I don't know.
I had heard (at one point,) that he had been diagnosed as having a form of autism or aspbergers, but heard nothing past this one remark.
(Interestingly, the one kid on the string I provided a link to was also diagnosed with this condition.)

-Even if he was on the same meds as this kid, what would have to be looked at (thoroughly,) would be if it was simply the patients emotional problems (to begin with,) vs.
if the med has caused significant side effects in other patients in identical situations.

What is clear is that this person ambushed a cop, then, mid rage, AFTER being shot in the chest, (not the easiest of experiences for the one being shot, btw,)
he still said 'kill me.'

THAT tells me that this was a person who was quite self destructive and in a lot of emotional pain.
--This is not even normal 'criminal,' behavior, when someone has sustained serious injury.
This person not only did NOT seek to protect themself (with their physical gestures,) after being shot,
NOR
did they make any appeal for help, (show understanding of a life ending injury and show physical attempts at self-protection,
(in other words, no normal physical nor emotional defence mechanisms (body motions, verbal pleas, etc.) were demonstrated by this mortally injured person.)
AND
-in a critically injured state, they were still rage filled, locked into that, and requesting death.

That's not normal at all.

That further tells me that something was not working properly in his mind, and IF the person was under the influence of adverse medication reaction (such as one of the chemicals he was prescribed,)such a situation may have 'hard wired,' this guy into acting this way.

---I have seen this in patients before, and it is quite common for someone who has severe emotional illness to even want to 'calm down,' and act correctly,-and not be able to.
When a person is stuck in a 'rage,' or 'acting out,' mode, their behaviors can be quite extreme, they can endure unbelievable injury and seemingly not feel it, and often they cannot calm down and can even tell you that they feel powerless to stop their own behaviors.
(So they can even understand what is going on, and not be able to control themselves.)

Dealing with a person who has completely gone over in that regard, -who is in a chemically controlled state (under meds,) is enormously difficult, ---which is also why professionals (be they cops or whatever,) try NOT to have them go off, and work with them a lot more cautiously.

It is not possible to work with a persons 'rational side,' if they don't have one, or if it is severely impared and blanketed by a chemical.

Now, You can spend your time blaming whomever you want.
You seem to get off on it, and provided I don't have to clean up your keyboard, I really don't care.

What I'm looking at here, is a possible situation where adolescent and adult patients are having a severe side effect to a relatively new med, ---that has resulted in extremely violent behaviors, and may have been a major contributor to this persons demise, -as well as the injuring of an officer.

I'd really like to see someone take the initiative (either legally or clinically,) to really pursue what these meds are doing to people, and pull them from the register of acceptable medications IF there is a significant threat of such severe side effects, or at least put a very direct warning and age limitation on who can and should use it.

It's being used as an alternative to another med that is being retired, but also was heavilly prescribed, (and is still currently used,)
-so there could be a LOT more of this happening if physicians are rolling patients over onto this particular med, or a regimine that is comprised of this grouping of meds.

It looks like this has happened before, which means that it could happen again.

That is a major concern.

Everyone knows a lot of these so called "mothers" most of which are not fit to even have kids lie that their child is crazy or retarded to get government checks. They get the child who is normal to behave crazy. Then get all kinds of drugs from the doctor and dope the kid up to get free money. All the drugs in time mess the child up for real. After 17 years a normal child can be totally messed up. Thats why I'd like to know how many of her children are on meds. SSI pays a lot more then welfare. SSI is also for life.
As for the cop I think the people of Fresno are tired of all the low life criminal trash and their defenders that think they can commit crimes then keep blaming the cops for stopping them.
But Lil' (insert stupig gang name here)
has the right to rob the liqour store. Lil'(__) has the right to threaten the other kids at school. Lil'(__) has the right to steal a car. Lil'(__) has the right to tag everywhere. Lil'(__) is a proud and mighty mighty criminal that represents.
If the police arrest or shoot Lil(__)they are being racist and dont understand Lil'(__) has the right to live like a savage.
It's because of people llike you that keep defending the Lil criminals and keep blaming the police they keep acting up. It's because of people like you that make excuses for them and blame the police no matter what.they think they can commit crimes. If the police shoot Lil (__) we will picket and protest because the police are always wrong.
We must look the other way because they are(insert stupid liberal excuse here) poor, mama was a druggie, their great grandma was a victim of racism, they were dropped on their head as a child, they are on meds, the teacher flunked them.
I'm surprised you people haven't tried to yell it was a set up and the police shot him then put the bat in his hand.
Well news flash Void people in a civilized society like Fresno don't except your excuses for these criminals or thier behavior and wont tolerate it.
The pictures I saw of his mother and father I saw on the news look like gang thugs to me. But then thats just my opinion. It would be interesting to know if the parents or other siblings of this Lil' (monster) have criminal records.
Stop blaming the cops and put the blame where it belongs on the parents.

This kid possibly had an adverse reaction to a med, it's been a documented problem in other treatment situations,

now the kid is dead, and an officer is wounded, (and) walking around for the rest of his life
-realizing that he had to take down a kid who attacked him (possibly,) because he was on meds that were making him worse.

-and all you can think about is if his mother is getting
'some sort of public assistance,
-and if she's some sort of 'welfare mother.'

amazing.
truly.

Do me a favor, 'k?

I mean,
you understand,
'Fresno Famous' is read by a ton of folks all over the country, (not just Fresno People.)
And no doubt, they're going to be looking up this string, as we just had a school shooting.

So, congrats, OB you've hit the big-time.

Stand up straight, your comments, after all, represent this town,

---everybody else?
---lets all just realize that Orange Bear represents this town too...

-and when they think '...gee, what's Fresno Like?'
Part of their reference material is Orange Bear.

I'll just let that sink in.

If true I'd like to know how many of them are on meds.
How many does she get a check for?
The public has the right to know!

I plan on going next week.

Okay... I think we hit a jackpot of sorts here:

http://www.drugs.com/forum/featured-drugs/geodon-17926.html

It's 'Drugs.com' (if you google Geodon, it will come up.)

Though there are some positive writings on this stuff, there are also profoundly negative writings (including a shooting,) where the shooter was on Geodon (see 'Theresa 42')

I shit you not.

There are a lot of reports of folks having increased rage problems, as well as increased panic, 'dream-state,'
(the shooter was a guy who had aspergers (aka a milder form of autism,) who hated the med, but who's parents wouldn't let him get off of it....

I was going to copy and paste, but truthfully, look it up and read the comments made by parents and such by people who are on it. ----pay particular attention to those who have 'adolescent' to early twenty sounding children

this just got very interesting.

The same med can cause different effects in people, ---but there are a lot of folks posting on this that are reporting behaviors that even include what just happened yesterday.

(the real kicker?
This information of severe side effects started coming in as early as 2004
--and the med had only been out since 2001.
--but even then, These are only a few stories, and the information and behaviors have been documented for almost FIVE years...)

Hmmm.

der-Hyphenator

I was looking up Lexapro (has been out a while,) and also looked up Geodone (out since '01?)
I'm seeing it used for schizophrenia and BiPolar 1
(It's in the same grouping as resperidol and zyprexa)

Stumbled across a med-site called:

'Med Help' Finding New Cures Together
(forum discussion of folks going on and off different meds with differing results.)
--Geodone has been replacing Zyprexa (good, Zyprexa has been not the best of meds for a lot of folks,)

when I found this post...
(Read for yourself)

submitted by MENTAL

'MENTAL'
Member since Jun 2005

, Jun 06, 2005 12:00AM
I HAD BEEN TAKING SERZONE FOR MANY YEARS AND I AM BIPOLARBipolar disorder
Bipolar disorder
I WAS PUT ON LEXAPRO 10MG 2XDAY.
I AM ALSO ON XANAXXanax Xanax xr.
THEY JUST PUT ME ON GEODONE.
ANYONE GOING TO TAKE IT DON'T!!!!!!
I HAVE NOT SLEPTED IN 5 DAYS, I WAS DOING GOOD ON SERZONE AND XANAXXanax Xanax xr.
SOMEONE HELP ME.
I JUST STARTED GEODONE INSTEAD AND HAVE NOT SLEPT ALSO VERY HOSTILE.
IF YOU CAN GET SERZONE OR LEXAPRO THEN TRY THAT ASK YOUR DOCTOR FIRSTFirst-progesterone vgs 200 First-progesterone vgs 400.
MY NUEROLOGIST TOLD ME TO STAY ON SERZONE AND XANAXXanax
Xanax xr.
NOW THEY TELL ME THAT SERZONE IS NO GOOD AND THAT I CANNOT GET IT.
ANYONE IF YOU KNOW THAT SERZONE IS ON THE MARKET AND STAYING ON THE MARKET ,,,PLEASE RESPOND ....
THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT KEPT ME IN BALANCE,,
I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR IT IS GOOD FOR ME NO SLEEP

Central sleep apnea
Drowsiness
Insomnia concerns
Irregular sleep
Irregular sleep-wake syndrome
Isolated sleep paralysis
Narcolepsy
Night terror
Obstructive sleep apnea
Polysomnography
Sleep IN 4 DAYS AND NIGHTS NOT GOOD
AND GETTING MORE AND MORE HOSTILE.

FOR THE PERSON WHO NED SOMETHING ELSE TRY SERZONE OR LEXAPRO TALK TO YOUR DR FIRZT THOUGH .THIS IS MY 40 YEAR EXPERIENCE ON DIFFERENT MEDS.'

-end quote-

(only editing I did was sort of 'formatting the sentences.'

Now...

Looking up Geodone is not showing a whole ton of results in terms of side-effects, but I need to look deeper, (still trying to find it in my PDR)

What is kind of interesting is:
-Geodone is a relatively new drug,
---which means it's probably bloody expensive.
---I figured, if the kid was on a 'fixed income,' sort of situation that there would be a lot of older meds (even stuff as new as zyprexa, or as old as ritalin,(etc) or some lithium based 'generic,' that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

---This post, however, (which is only one on a site where zyprexa patients are stepping off of it, and going onto Geodone, --was a bit startling to say the least.)

--I'm curious how long he was on this particular regimine, if there were any other meds involved, IF he had just had his med-load changed,,,
(There are also the variables that a 16-17 year old kid is kind of unstable chemically by nature to begin with...)

But the profound thing I'm reading here is profound anxiety and hostility increase in the post'r (granted he had other meds he was on as well, but the subbing in of Geodone, the lay off of zyprexa, serzone and zanax and the lay off of apparently was NOT a good thing.)

Channel 24 is reporting the student was on the anti-depressant Lexapro which has the side effects of agitation, confusion and seizures. He was also on the anti psychotic Geodone which is used to treat patients with acute agitation in schizophrenic patients. It has the side effects of agitation, hostility and confusion.
He also had a knife with him on the day of the shooting.
They also reported he brought a butcher knife to school three years ago and police had been called to his parents's house last summer.

I've not had a chance to review the interviews and such (the 'bee live broadcast,' did not work on my computer.)

I have heard, based upon what were purportedly comments that the young man was making '...what are you going to do now, kill me, c'mon kill me.' (I had heard this from one source and one source alone.)

-that this (quite possibly,) was suicide by cop.
(putting oneself in a situation where an armed officer has to respond with deadly force, because they feel that their life, or others lives are in jeopardy, and there is no other option than to take the assailant out.)

I think it would be important to see what history he had of behaviors, the meds that he was on, his behaviors just prior to going after the officer, (as well as) how the meds were affecting him.

When dealing with a medicated person (for destructive behavior, be it towards self or others,) you are working with (often) a combination of meds that do not insure 'calm and mellow,' and 'fix everything.'
--It's strange, but a lot of folks on anti-depressants will tell you 'It's not that I feel happy, I just feel 'anti-depressed.' (which is a rather queer sensation of 'headed towards,' those feelings, --but not arriving at them, (kind of like falling off of a building and stopping mid flight just before hitting the ground, you can stare at it, you know it's how you feel, but you don't arrive there, and you often don't care...)

It's not always the most comfortable feeling, has it's own sort of anxiety to it, and (for many,) feels like a sort of 'bandwith,' of operation (rather than,) the fully grounded feeling of one's regular feelings, (even if those feelings are less than positive.
- going off the meds, can be a major backlash (chemically,)

--as well as IF somebody really gets mad and goes past the coverage of the meds in their system, they go full on (worse than before.)

There's a lot to this that we'll probably never know.
-what sort of meds.
-was he properly monitored.
-were they applicable meds that really were working.
-was he on his correct dosage.
-what had his behaviors been prior?
-what was happening in his body (body-chem wise,) prior
-had he been exercising, had he shifted his diet radically, had he slept well, had he had an argument or had something else in his life caused a 'build up,' and 'trigger.' scenario.

It's also interesting to see someone so young (interesting may not be the best word, certainly it's tragic,)
opting for suicide and suicide by cop at such a young age.
--If he's a soph. at (just) seventeen, that sort of says something as well, --why was he in a grade that traditionally is people two years younger?
-was there a learning disability?
-did he feel awkward about his size and personal characteristic (compared to) the average HS soph?
-did he feel that he was failing out and not making it in school, --while other kids his age were already getting ready to graduate?

It has been a common occurance in a lot of settings where, when a person reaches a certain age, grade level, or level of achievement, for that individual to graduate and go on, ----for there to be a lot of anxiety.

I've seen guys who were tops in their programs, deliberately go out and sabotage their progress, (out of fear, etc.)
---another aspect (which happens in HS's all the time,) is 'senior syndrome.' which is usually (more romantically) played out as some poor soul who thinks HS is all there is, can't handle leaving it, and off's themself in a car in the parking lot after the big game at the end of the year... (creepy cliche' -but it does happen.)

-a 'down side,' version of that would be someone who is not making it in school, (or sometimes HAS been making it,) ---but sees no real reason to go on and remain in ,(or graduate, etc.) --because there is nothing better for them to do.

It's unusual to some, but even some of the most profoundly disabled (mentally,) people in programs and life in general, if they see the end of the road coming up in a sense (it could be a residence, a relationship, schooling, (etc.) will choose to wipe it all out,
---before it all crumbles beneath them,
---or they find that they're not going to make it outside of the world that they've become accustomed to. (I don't know if that would apply to someone who is a sophomore, but it is a possibility.)

I don't think this person just 'out of nowhere,' went off, Everybody has preceeding behaviors, (everybody.)
--if such IS the case?
I'd want to see what happened just prior to the incident (again, major med change, diet change, relationship change, (etc.)

It's just a sad situation.
Sad that a kid died and resorted to this.
Sad that an officer was attacked and was injured, (thankfully not killed,)
and sad, that, if this had obvious warning signs and ANY sort of antecedant (preview) behaviors, ---that they were not picked up on and worked with.

It could have been a lot worse, but one officer is injured, one kid is dead, -that's bad enough.

PS:
Regarding carrying a concealed weapon (and) carrying a (seen) weapon.

Nearly all officers, (be they police, military, private patrol, (etc) on any town, state, or fed level often carry more than one weapon, and it has never been seen as illegal or 'not allowed.'

-If you are permitted to carry a weapon,
usually you are also permitted to carry a concealed weapon as well,
(it goes with the job,) and back-up firearms are not at all unusual, nor considered in the wrong.

I'm reviewing (in my mind here,) nearly 40 years of knowing folks who were in that line of work, and all of them usually carried more than one (often one concealed.)

-the 'magazine falling out of the gun,' thing is a bit awkward, but it can happen. (I doubt the officer will be sticking with that same weapon without seriously checking out why it happened, -and may possibly opt for a different model or type in the future.)

I still wondering if this is very much an EDP situation.
(re: Lola's comment about how we'd handle it.)

Interestingly enough:
-having been trained and having been given license to use force that was necessary (when attacked,) my methodology of 'deactivating,' a situation (as well as a person,) were radically different when it was as a (private,) police officer.
--do you want to prevent harm and injury to others (including the individual,) sure, ---but the moves you take and how you handle the individual are a lot more in line with what you were describing that 'any of us would do.'

--when an officer is dealt with a (known,) emotionally disturbed person, (often,) the attempt is to be a lot more graceful (for lack of a better word,) AS there is a realization that the person who is 'going off,' is not in their right mind, and may be suffering a lot.
--My own physical and verbal (etc.) response to a (known) emotionally disturbed individual is different than 'just some guy attacking.' --and the difference is quite radical (and not all people can transition from one to the other.)
-So, yeah, I"ve had people of that size (and larger,) in a variety of situations do life-threatening things (with clubs and knives, etc.) and my response was different
-as I knew I was dealing with someone who was 'not right in the head.'

The whole approach is different, --and I've observed entire police forces responding to a suspect's behavior change (as in completely back off, find a new method of handling,) and NOT seek to see the situation escalate,
---when dealing with a known EDP.

I really believe the world may end today!
I absolutely agree with you.

Now lets really piss these gang thugs off.
Lets hang up blue ribbons all over Fresno in support of Fresno P.D. and have Officer Perry Day at the Grizzlies when he gets better.

there is a ton of speculation going on in this post. as alway a bunch of opinion that wont help anything. the bottom line is that this officer acted in self defense. if any of you were put in the situation that officer perry was, i would bet that you'd all pull the trigger. i would. i have a family, a child and a life to consider. when im on the ground looking up at a 220lb MAN i would definatly act in MY best interest.
black, white, gang affiliated or not, the fact is, when facing death, you fight back.
as a police officer, he was equipped to do just that.
and strangely enough, with this boy being treated for depression, knowing he was attacking a armed officer, i think (my 2 cents) he knew exactly what he was doing, did it intentionally, with the exact outcome he may have wanted.
suicide.

As in Sureno 13?
Are we suppose to feel intimidated by you?
You can't even spell "juror".
As an officer of the Law Perry should not need to have any type of permit to carry a gun.
It is his job to protect the public.
Here come all the liberal ACLU crybabies he was a good kid, a mother lost a baby, and he was on meds.
Boo Hoo Hoo!
Jackels and wolves have babys too.
Alot of "good Kids" on meds are in gangs.
It's a scam mama's runs to get a free check every month for life.
They go to the doctor and to school and have the kid act crazy.
I could see him just suddenly going off and grabbing something and hitting someone.
But to actually get a broken bat, wrap it with black tape and come up behind a cop?
He didn't just find the bat laying on the ground.
This was premeditated and planned out in advance.
He did not just snap.
This was probably retaliation on the cop for busting homies or some sort of other gang thing.
Then they figured they could use the mentally impaired defense.
Atleast Fresno P.D. will turn up the heat on gang members again this weekemnd.

Thanks for the info, jurer 13(not verified). Where did you get it? I ask because it's contrary to everything else I've read and heard on the matter. Or is it just your opinion?

If the assailant was an EDP (emotionally disturbed person,) who was on anti-depressants?
--and I'm talking prescribed medicine for some sort of depression or ANY chemically treated emotional disturbance?

It's quite different.

A person who is emotionally disturbed (and on meds,) often has great difficulty (if any ability,) to function in their behaviors without them, ---and often has difficulty even while on them.
-Often when somebody who is even the most heavily medicated 'goes off,' the behaviors are explosive, VERY unlike their normal behaviors, and you very quickly are dealing with a person who has accellerated behaviors that they have no real control over.
---reasoning with somebody like that is very hard to do.
---they themselves do not have the ability (often) to reason
---they also (because of the chemistry imbalance furthered by the outburst,) may not be able control their behaviors even while trying.

It's different than somebody who is untreated, and considered 'normal,' who goes off and shows deliberate reasoning to hurt somebody.

In a lot of ways, it's a professional care giver, or officers worst nightmare. Some person who is 'not right,' who (probably,) would not want to hurt somebody (under regular circumstances,) but because of their situation, acts out, and has to be stopped.

Despite the local mindset/opinion:
-no cop wants to deliberately go out and hurt somebody.
-no cop wants to just up and shoot somebody, (let alone kill them.)
-And I doubt very highly that this officer wanted to do what he had to do, ---which was (it looks like,) NOT involving somebody who was 'normal.'

---and again, depending upon his body chemistry at the time that he went off, or the level of his emotional disturbance (as well as) effectiveness and influence of the meds he was on, He may actually have been 'a good kid,' who was under influences that may have significantly affected his judgement and behaviors.

That has to be taken into consideration.

These criminals should not even be allowed in public schools.
The trouble is the parents are usually criminals and allow their children to grow up to be criminals.
Then they want to blame everyone but themself.
The City and the Officer Perry should sue the parents for all expenses, pain and suffering.

the whole concept of 'anniversary' acts of crime is quite real, and has been an ongoing concern since such things as the columbine shootings, WACO, (etc) and most institutions are aware of the anniversary dates or dates of significance in terms of heightened security, A LOT of malevolent behaviors are sparked and 'authenticated,' by previous acts of violence.

--Considering how remote and removed Fresno is from the rest of the world in terms of events and such, dunno if the assailant of the police officer was aware of the Va Tech shootings as a cause, -or whether he just felt like clubbing an innocent bystander in a uniform that day.

(Edit:
Now, having just read:

--reading the Bee report (online) does state that the student
'had been on anti-depressant meds, 'but was doing favorably.'

---There has been a LOT of recent cases where adolescents taking meds for depression and emotional concerns have snapped and have gone off the charts in both homicidal and suicidal behaviors.
-It would be interesting to see what meds the student was on, as well as what his histories and behaviors were.
(Again, we'll probably never know due to patient privacy rights (which is a good thing,)
---but that he was being treated for an emotional concern definitely changes how his behaviors are to be interpreted.
-Another factor is: depending upon what sort of meds he was taking, (as well as what his med-plan was (meds offered, meds affordable,) there are some meds that are being largely discontinued, (and replaced with others that are more expensive,)
--vs.-- meds that have been found to not work so well, (but are still in circulation, particularly in lower economic sectors.)
--So, what's considered 'under a doctors care' (which is the only way you're on 'meds for depression,') has different meanings depending upon how much money the patient's family has, as well as what their plan uses.

--Again, it would be interesting to see what meds were involved, as well as (if) this could have been caused by a chemical interraction, -or a behavior accellerated and exaggerated by problems with the meds.
(do a study on adolescents and psychotropic / behavioral meds some time, even under IDEAL conditions... it's chilling.)

Though he's considered 'at the far end' of adolescence, he DID just turn seventeen (though physically he has been kind of an 'adult,' for a while,)

---a lot of these meds (with extended use,) loose their effectivness, (AND) a lot of them, with the body maturing do change in their areas of effect,
-and sometimes bring on additional effects as well.
(This happens with diabetics for example, -as you get older and become 'an adult,' you have to change your chemical spectrum for meds. The behavioral aspects to this can be quite dramatic.

We used to work with some meds for behaviors that, when used in children (pre-adolescent and mid-acolescent,)
-as they changed and matured, the exact opposite effect was found by using the same med,(the body chemistry affected things that severely.)
---and this had much to do with explosive behaviors, rage conttrol, delusions, (etc.)

--Diagnosing this situation (when the meds were causing additional concerns,) sometimes took months, (and) switching over to a more suitable med (also) took a bit of time and trial and error, and had a 'ramping up,' time (where the meds were adjusted to best possible strength and regimine for the person in question.)
---and that was in a facility with full time staff observing everything 24-7 (and) decent money behind the effort.

-who knows what level of care (or lack of,) this person had?

Very easily, this could have been a person who could have been having their meds sorted out over the past two years, ---who started out with a regimine designed for a twelve to thirteen year old. (Which is different than what he was yesterday.)

psych. meds are not 'immediate,' and often not pinpoint accurate, either.

Now
-Does it make any difference in terms of being a person assaulted with a modified bat, (essentially turned into a billy club,)?
Unfortunately, No.

Whether you have an emotionally disturbed person coming at you and hitting you looking to bash your skull in (or) somebody who is 'in their right mind,' doing such, -the concerns (protect self / protect others,) still is the main concern.

But these factors do shade the tragedy of this into deeper areas,
(not simply 'banger gets off'd after attacking cop.' -as some have suggested.

That this was an emotionally disturbed person, in a lot of ways, changes things.

A lot.

This is truly sad.

makes me thankful we didn't have that at my school. We had bad stuff everywhere, but we didn't need school security or cops just rollin around. Nutty

We'll be getting a full dose of media on this for a while I'm sure.

I'm guessing adult. Though a 17 year old sophomore does say something.

Diablo

This is no manchild.
He is full grown and bigger then most adults.
But I guess they will try to play the misguided retarded child BS.
From what I saw of his family they look like gangbanger thugs too.

I talked to a news source (channel 30) who talked to a teacher in the scene that backed up the officer's story. Not that it's gospel, but it's something.

Have any of you been on the Roosevelt Campus and seen how those gang animals behave. They spray paint and tag up the bathrooms. At lunch time they cuss at the lunch ladies and try to steal food with out paying. This is not the first time staff members have been hit. Roosevelt is your typical inner city gang infested High School. You,d think Superintendant Hanson would have Learned from the McClane and DeWolf incidence of violence. The stituation at Fresno High is just as bad.
Next mommy will be on the news crying about her dead baby and teling us he was a good boy while she represents. I'm willing to bet she will be wearing a red Fresno State sweatshirt and red fuzzy slippers.
They need to start letting teachers and staff carry guns. Its time to stop forcing "students" to go to public school and make it for the ones that want an education. If they don't want to get an education put them in a military style boot camp. Then when 18 put them in the military. This way they learn a job skill and earn their keep. If they are juvinile criminals give them a choice jail or boot camp no exception.
Stop wasting tax dollars on criminals that dont want to learn or graduate. Get back to educating students that want to learn. Get all the cultural BS, tolerance, gang and sexual deviants out of the schools. I for one am glad the officer had the gun. I say people tired of this criminal BS and tired of all the criminal rights supporters shouuld picket at the criminals funeral.

Re: private offices (as well as) police officers carrying firearms, -yes campus police are permitted to do so if properly trained and licensed (this has been for at least twenty five to thirty years, if not more, depending on the state.)

Re: was this deadly force used on the officer that justified the use of a firearm.

-what is not being said is:
getting hit in the back of the head (particularly near the base of the head,) is one of the most vulnerable areas of the skull, (if) the assailant had connected more completely, the officer would be either dead or paralyzed, no questions asked.
It's kind of a miracle that the assailant didn't connect more thoroughly.

(It is also probable that the officer, if hit from behind,) did not see the bat coming at him, which (again,) means more likely a deadly blow.

Though there are more 'scarey,' and violent weapons,
--a blunt instrument (such as a bat or club,) is still something that can weild deadly force, and this very nearly was.

That this happened is very unfortunate.
-That this was a 6'2" 220lb 'manchild' (who was aged 17)
constitutes a violent combative situation between two men (physiologically,) and not 'adult vs. child.'

Unfortunate choice (made by the teenager,) but likely (required) choice made by the officer.
--I wonder IF the teen had successfully clubbed the officer to death,
-would they just throw him in Juvi?
-or would they have tried him as an adult?'

love all the guests that come out on something like this. especially when they spew out the stuff normally found on craigslist.

fact: the officer isn't white. it'll be pretty hard to pin it on "whitey cop" since he's black.

officers on school campuses carry guns. that's standard. they're police officers. they are allowed to, and have done so for quite some time. when i was @ edison from 91-94, our campus officer carried. the news i heard only identified him as a police officer, so i'm not sure what capacity he was there as. but, i know that probation and police officers can and do carry, but security is usually something different, they aren't police. and police on campus are armed with their service pistols whether or not the "student body is packin."

it is unfortunate that something bad has happened there. hopefully, the truth of it all will come out.

When I went to Clovis High back 1989-92 the campus police officer also carried a gun, PR24, taser, the works. And NOTHING ever happened out there then, except for cars getting keyed and a few kids cutting classes. I'm pretty sure it's standard...

-s

It sounds like the assailant jumped him from behind and hit him with a bat that was modded to be a club. What do you think the dead boy's intentions were?

Edit: Since it isn't obvious (I guess), he shot the kid in self defense. No one can say whether it was intended to merely stop him or kill him, but when an officer pulls a gun, it is to use it with deadly force when necessary. Or should the officer have politely asked the kid to stop, or let him beat him a couple more times until his brains were splattered on the sidewalk?

He killed a kid.

I want to know why he had a gun on campus. Is that standard?

Diablo

The officer was hurt. I'd have to assume he's innocent at this point, given the initial details.