6 ms·

Cases like Tom Perez should never happen. He was held for the murder of his father who was alive. They told him they had video of him dumping bloddy clothes and

Cases like Tom Perez should never happen. He was held for the murder of his father who was alive. They told him they had video of him dumping bloddy clothes and they knew where he had buried the body. They the said that they would kill his dog and even brought the dog in for him to say goodbye. Should be illegal. https://abc11.com/post/city-fontana-reaches-900k-settlement-tom-perez-was-pressured-confess-he-killed-father-alive/15275361/ https://abc11.com/post/city-fontana-reaches-900k-settlement-...

nickff 2y ago
That’s shocking, and sounds like psychological torture. That police officer should be criminally prosecuted (though it’s difficult to get a prosecutor to go after the police).
ClumsyPilot 2y ago
> They the said that they would kill his dog Someone should be in prison. This will not end untill there are personal consequences.
- guyfromfargo 2y ago
  The article says the officers got promoted.
  - simoncion 2y ago
    I'm not sure why this comment was killed. A heading in the ABC 11 article is literally "Officers involved were later promoted". The text of the article later goes on to say > Months after the interrogation, Guthrie was named a 2019 Employee of the Year for the Fontana Police Department. > Guthrie is now a sergeant. So is Janusz. > And Michael Dorsey, the lieutenant who Guthrie says told him and Janusz that officers believed Perez Jr. had killed his father, has been promoted to captain and is now chief of police of Fontana, overseeing 188 sworn officers, according to its website.
    - 77pt77 2y ago
      The system working as intended. This is the hierarchy of competence I keep hearing about.
      - lazide 2y ago
        The underlying thing folks miss is - competence in what. Near as I can tell, they were quite competent in what city leadership wanted.
        Yeul 2y ago
        The Chinese have the right to complain about their leaders. We don't because we choose them willingly. Crime goes down, the poors don't riot and that's all that matters.
        ClumsyPilot 2y ago
        > We don't because we choose them willingly I mean technically Russia does have elections.
        lazide 2y ago
        Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos!
- tolerance 2y ago
  I’m curious why you chose to draw the line there.
  - kyleee 2y ago
    Are you really? Ever heard the line “dog is a man’s best friend”? Or seen that Jon Wick movie?
    - tolerance 2y ago
      I reckon that once the police start trying to frame a man for the imaginary murder of his own father, threatening to actually kill his dog sounds like the most drab of offenses Especially on account of that coming into play later.
      - pdpi 2y ago
        Your “trying to frame a man” is their “trying to get him to confess to something he did”. It’s intellectually lazy on their part to jump to that conclusion without any sort of due diligence, but it’s not necessarily evil per se. Threatening to kill the dog is just plain cruel.
        tolerance 2y ago
        I’ll try to keep this in mind in case you and I cross paths while I have the upper hand and I happen to be feeling an intellectually lazy sort of way. Whatever happens shouldn’t be attributed to malice. I won’t hurt your pets. My superiors ought to award me for it. I was just being stupid.
        ClumsyPilot 2y ago
        > Your “trying to frame a man” is their “trying to get him to confess to something he did”. This is not a valid activity. Either you have proof or you don’t. A proper hardened criminal will never confess. If you have a confession, it’s >70% chance for perversion of justice: A terrorist will confess because they want fame In Russia you pay someone to ‘confess’ for your crime and go to prison instead of you. The naive, mentally infirm will confess, often to things they didn’t do. Or you managed to torture a confession out of someone, like they did here. Confessions lead straight to Spanish Inquisition type of justice
- Blackthorn 2y ago
  Cops routinely kill dogs as a matter of course, and say whatever they want to the arrested. Personal consequences for it are laughable, especially in the current political climate.
  - Natsu 2y ago
    Pets are considered mere property damage by the law. I think that's pretty out of line with how most pet owners would feel about anyone hurting their pets.
    - nimbius 2y ago
      well, that depends. your pet? just property. harm or kill a police dog however? youll do 45 years in prison because thats not property, its a "K-9 cop" https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/news/man-who-killed-police-dog-gets-45-years-in-prison/ https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/news/man-who-killed-police... double standards like this are how Rome burned.
      - Natsu 2y ago
        I don't mind that being the punishment there so much as I mind that not being the punishment for someone who murders my pet.
      - nindalf 2y ago
        Anything someone doesn’t like becomes a reason Rome burned. Water pipes made of lead? Rome burned. Invasions by barbarian tribes that I’m going to liken to modern immigration to push my anti-immigration stance? Rome burned. Adoption of Christianity by Theodosius in 395AD? Believe it or not, Rome burned in 410AD. “Double standards”? Rome burned. This only works on people who’ve never opened a history book in their lives. Why would you try it here, where people are much more likely to be familiar with Roman history?
        faggotbreath 2y ago
        [dead]
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> They the said that they would kill his dog This crosses from lie to threat. Totally unacceptable.
- crooked-v 2y ago
  Why is lying acceptable?
  - RiverCrochet 2y ago
    Lying is wrong, but murder is wronger.
    - evanfarrar 2y ago
      great, if you can figure out how to lie to only murderers we wouldn’t even need police to investigate
      - adastra22 2y ago
        He was talking about the dog.
        exe34 2y ago
        the dog didn't lie
        mike978 2y ago
        occasionally when it was told "down".
    - rjmill 2y ago
      And killing a dog is wrongest.
    - llm_trw 2y ago
      The police do both. So are they wrongest?
ChainOfFools 2y ago
The city is locally referred to as Fontucky, evidently for good reason.
- c420 2y ago
  I believe it got that name because of the KKK chapter that was based there.
jjulius 2y ago
And cops wonder why people don't trust them.
- listenallyall 2y ago
  I dont think cops wonder about that at all
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
crossroadsguy 2y ago
I am from India where we have jokes about our police and how extreme the corruption is and how bad our police is compared to the ones from other nations[1]. But then I often read about USA and police corruption there, brutality, and virtual immunity (strike virtual out maybe) they enjoy and I feel that definitely trumps Indian police in this aspects by a crazy margin. At least we can technically hold them accountable here and we often do. [1] One of them is that there was a tiger set free in a dense forest somewhere and police from Germany, Japan, and India were tasked to track it down each time as a challenge. Japan found the tiger in 4 hours, Germany in 12 hours. Indian police party was nowhere to be seen. Hours passed, days passed. Finally after the end of the 12th day the Japanese and German police banded together and went to find/rescue the Indian police party. They saw the police party had set camp deep inside the forest and they had a monkey hung upside down from a tree that they were taking turns beating and telling it to confess that it was the tiger.
- z3phyr 2y ago
  Simply in India, anything told to the police is not applicable as evidence in the court of law. Only statements in front of Judges are applicable. So it makes no sense for police to interrogate to get answers.
- z3phyr 2y ago
  Simply in India, anything told to the police is not applicable as evidence in the court of law. Only statements in front of Judges are applicable. So it makes no sense for police to interrogate to get answers.
openasocket 2y ago
To be clear, what they did to Tom Perez was ALREADY illegal. Which is why he was able to sue and win $900K. If you want to prevent these sorts of things from happening in the future, adding another ban on this behavior isn’t going to do it. There needs to be consequences for the officers that do this. It’s not the officers paying $900K, it’s the city. And they aren’t getting fired, the officers that did that to Tom Perez even got promoted! The system of accountability needs to be reformed. Maybe that means reforming qualified immunity, maybe demoting and firing officers for misconduct, maybe prosecutors need to start indicting officers when their behavior gets to the point of criminality. Personally, I think if you could sue, say, the police union rather than the city when there is misconduct, things would turn around fast.

nickff 2y ago

That’s shocking, and sounds like psychological torture. That police officer should be criminally prosecuted (though it’s difficult to get a prosecutor to go after the police).

ClumsyPilot 2y ago

> They the said that they would kill his dog Someone should be in prison. This will not end untill there are personal consequences.

guyfromfargo 2y ago
The article says the officers got promoted.
- simoncion 2y ago
  I'm not sure why this comment was killed. A heading in the ABC 11 article is literally "Officers involved were later promoted". The text of the article later goes on to say > Months after the interrogation, Guthrie was named a 2019 Employee of the Year for the Fontana Police Department. > Guthrie is now a sergeant. So is Janusz. > And Michael Dorsey, the lieutenant who Guthrie says told him and Janusz that officers believed Perez Jr. had killed his father, has been promoted to captain and is now chief of police of Fontana, overseeing 188 sworn officers, according to its website.
  - 77pt77 2y ago
    The system working as intended. This is the hierarchy of competence I keep hearing about.
    - lazide 2y ago
      The underlying thing folks miss is - competence in what. Near as I can tell, they were quite competent in what city leadership wanted.
      - Yeul 2y ago
        The Chinese have the right to complain about their leaders. We don't because we choose them willingly. Crime goes down, the poors don't riot and that's all that matters.
        ClumsyPilot 2y ago
        > We don't because we choose them willingly I mean technically Russia does have elections.
        lazide 2y ago
        Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos!
tolerance 2y ago
I’m curious why you chose to draw the line there.
- kyleee 2y ago
  Are you really? Ever heard the line “dog is a man’s best friend”? Or seen that Jon Wick movie?
  - tolerance 2y ago
    I reckon that once the police start trying to frame a man for the imaginary murder of his own father, threatening to actually kill his dog sounds like the most drab of offenses Especially on account of that coming into play later.
    - pdpi 2y ago
      Your “trying to frame a man” is their “trying to get him to confess to something he did”. It’s intellectually lazy on their part to jump to that conclusion without any sort of due diligence, but it’s not necessarily evil per se. Threatening to kill the dog is just plain cruel.
      - tolerance 2y ago
        I’ll try to keep this in mind in case you and I cross paths while I have the upper hand and I happen to be feeling an intellectually lazy sort of way. Whatever happens shouldn’t be attributed to malice. I won’t hurt your pets. My superiors ought to award me for it. I was just being stupid.
      - ClumsyPilot 2y ago
        > Your “trying to frame a man” is their “trying to get him to confess to something he did”. This is not a valid activity. Either you have proof or you don’t. A proper hardened criminal will never confess. If you have a confession, it’s >70% chance for perversion of justice: A terrorist will confess because they want fame In Russia you pay someone to ‘confess’ for your crime and go to prison instead of you. The naive, mentally infirm will confess, often to things they didn’t do. Or you managed to torture a confession out of someone, like they did here. Confessions lead straight to Spanish Inquisition type of justice
Blackthorn 2y ago
Cops routinely kill dogs as a matter of course, and say whatever they want to the arrested. Personal consequences for it are laughable, especially in the current political climate.
- Natsu 2y ago
  Pets are considered mere property damage by the law. I think that's pretty out of line with how most pet owners would feel about anyone hurting their pets.
  - nimbius 2y ago
    well, that depends. your pet? just property. harm or kill a police dog however? youll do 45 years in prison because thats not property, its a "K-9 cop" https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/news/man-who-killed-police-dog-gets-45-years-in-prison/ https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/news/man-who-killed-police... double standards like this are how Rome burned.
    - Natsu 2y ago
      I don't mind that being the punishment there so much as I mind that not being the punishment for someone who murders my pet.
    - nindalf 2y ago
      Anything someone doesn’t like becomes a reason Rome burned. Water pipes made of lead? Rome burned. Invasions by barbarian tribes that I’m going to liken to modern immigration to push my anti-immigration stance? Rome burned. Adoption of Christianity by Theodosius in 395AD? Believe it or not, Rome burned in 410AD. “Double standards”? Rome burned. This only works on people who’ve never opened a history book in their lives. Why would you try it here, where people are much more likely to be familiar with Roman history?
      - faggotbreath 2y ago
        [dead]

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> They the said that they would kill his dog This crosses from lie to threat. Totally unacceptable.

crooked-v 2y ago
Why is lying acceptable?
- RiverCrochet 2y ago
  Lying is wrong, but murder is wronger.
  - evanfarrar 2y ago
    great, if you can figure out how to lie to only murderers we wouldn’t even need police to investigate
    - adastra22 2y ago
      He was talking about the dog.
      - exe34 2y ago
        the dog didn't lie
        mike978 2y ago
        occasionally when it was told "down".
  - rjmill 2y ago
    And killing a dog is wrongest.
  - llm_trw 2y ago
    The police do both. So are they wrongest?

ChainOfFools 2y ago

The city is locally referred to as Fontucky, evidently for good reason.

c420 2y ago
I believe it got that name because of the KKK chapter that was based there.

jjulius 2y ago

And cops wonder why people don't trust them.

listenallyall 2y ago
I dont think cops wonder about that at all

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

crossroadsguy 2y ago

I am from India where we have jokes about our police and how extreme the corruption is and how bad our police is compared to the ones from other nations[1]. But then I often read about USA and police corruption there, brutality, and virtual immunity (strike virtual out maybe) they enjoy and I feel that definitely trumps Indian police in this aspects by a crazy margin. At least we can technically hold them accountable here and we often do. [1] One of them is that there was a tiger set free in a dense forest somewhere and police from Germany, Japan, and India were tasked to track it down each time as a challenge. Japan found the tiger in 4 hours, Germany in 12 hours. Indian police party was nowhere to be seen. Hours passed, days passed. Finally after the end of the 12th day the Japanese and German police banded together and went to find/rescue the Indian police party. They saw the police party had set camp deep inside the forest and they had a monkey hung upside down from a tree that they were taking turns beating and telling it to confess that it was the tiger.

z3phyr 2y ago
Simply in India, anything told to the police is not applicable as evidence in the court of law. Only statements in front of Judges are applicable. So it makes no sense for police to interrogate to get answers.
z3phyr 2y ago
Simply in India, anything told to the police is not applicable as evidence in the court of law. Only statements in front of Judges are applicable. So it makes no sense for police to interrogate to get answers.

openasocket 2y ago

To be clear, what they did to Tom Perez was ALREADY illegal. Which is why he was able to sue and win $900K. If you want to prevent these sorts of things from happening in the future, adding another ban on this behavior isn’t going to do it. There needs to be consequences for the officers that do this. It’s not the officers paying $900K, it’s the city. And they aren’t getting fired, the officers that did that to Tom Perez even got promoted! The system of accountability needs to be reformed. Maybe that means reforming qualified immunity, maybe demoting and firing officers for misconduct, maybe prosecutors need to start indicting officers when their behavior gets to the point of criminality. Personally, I think if you could sue, say, the police union rather than the city when there is misconduct, things would turn around fast.