Roberto1 wrote on Apr 17, 2008 7:56 PM:It okay to smack woman on the butt...as proven once again in corrupt riverside county.

To Roberto1 wrote on Apr 17, 2008 8:34 PM:And it's not ok to try and beat someone to death for mistakenly smacking a woman on the butt, when no malice was intended. With your attitude you are going to have a rough life!

Special Class of Citizen wrote on Apr 17, 2008 9:05 PM:STILL NO BAL on the "Peace" Officer!!!

ModernRock wrote on Apr 17, 2008 9:28 PM:All the evidence is in and they found the police officer innocent (self defense). Well, Well, Well. Where are all those conspiracy bloggers now? I question everything, but the police officer is clearly innocent in this case. And if someone smacks your girlfriend in the butt (in this case accidently), don't get 3 of your buddies and jump that person.

to Special Class of Citizen wrote on Apr 17, 2008 10:13 PM:The restuarant would have a receipt for the number of drinks ordered. The waiter would have remember serving the ODO many drinks. All waiters/bartenders are trained to watch for people over the limit as they can be sued if someone gets drunk and drives and hurts someone.
Other businesses would have remembered serving him. Especially if he were obvously drunk.
Let's focus on the behaviour prior to the shooting by both men.
Let's hear from a witness who was on the street when the fight began and the shooting took place. I don't care about the BAL of either man. I want to know who started it, who threw the first punch and if a chair was used as a weapon prior to the officer shooting.
That behavior is what is important. Not if either man had drinks before it happened. The BAL is only 1 factor of many.

It is impossible wrote on Apr 17, 2008 10:29 PM:to hold a peace Officer in CA accountable for anything! There was absolutly no doubt in my mind that the RCSO would clear this man and that no results of a blood test that was not favorable to the police officer would be revealed.

Gary wrote on Apr 18, 2008 6:43 AM:Why are police authorized to carry weapons off-duty? Especially going to bars and drinking? Yes, he was attacked, but any other citizen not an off-duty cop and Vilan would still be alive.

It is written... wrote on Apr 18, 2008 6:43 AM:That we have a right to defend ourself when in fear for our life? The fact that this was an ODO wouldn't change that. This man was brutally attacked. He feared for his life and he defended himself. Period.
Speaking of numbers...Vilan supporters should post numbers of previous assaults. I don't think we'll ever hear about those results.

to It is impossible wrote on Apr 18, 2008 6:49 AM:Is it possible that the officer was justified? Is it possible the other guys attacked him? Or are all cops presumed guilty by you?

did you ever stop and think that cops are frequently targets by unscrupulous people trying to take advantage of them because they are high profile and can be sued?
Sure there a a few bad cops but there are WAY more criminals out there.

Preferential Treatment wrote on Apr 18, 2008 9:50 AM:He fired his weapon off duty. He should have been given a drug/blood alcohol test. That should be standard operating procedure then we would not have these lingering doubts that he was given PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT BECAUSE HE'S A COP.

Gary in Winchester wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:18 AM:We will never know if he was guilty or not. What we do no was that this police officer was given special treatment that the average citizen would not have gotten. RCSO has given itself another black eye.

Please wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:21 AM:Everyone that thinks this case deserves more answers and a better investigation, please write a letter to the district attorney. There was no reason that Riverside County did not conduct a BAC test on the officer. Don't let this incident get swept under the rug. A man lost his life; a son lost his father; a mother lost her son; siblings lost their brother; a girlfriend is left alone and broken hearted; and friends have lost a friend. Don't let this happen to anyone else.

Preferntial Treatment 2 wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:28 AM:Cops should be given preferential treatment, they've earned it. That is why when they testify in court their testimony is their testimony is held in higher regard than the normal citizen. Cops are suppose to be held in higher regard. Cops are truly treated as if they a not guilty until proven innocent. I'm OK with that. If we through every cop in jail for someone accusing them of wrong doing they'd all be sitting in jail instead of protecting us.

To Gary wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:34 AM:I for one am happy officers carry guns when off duty. This officer did not carry a gun into a bar. He carried his gun into a restaurant which happens to have a bar. Not everyone goes out hunting for a bar to get drunk like Vilan and his crew.

You are correct if the cop didn't have a gun Vilan would be alive and the cop would be dead. Vilan would be back in prision and we'd have 1 less cop on the streets.

You logic just doesn't make any sense. You might has well have said if the cop decided to eat at Rosa's Vilan would be alive. Why are you blaming the gun/cop and not Vilan's actions?

Jim wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:37 AM:Commenting on incidents that I know nothing about makes me feel good.

to: Gary wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:45 AM:The argument for cops to carry weapons is they fear they will be recognized by the bad guys and need a way to protect themselves. Okay. But with privilege comes responsibility. They are trainined to diffuse volatile situations, keep the peace, maintain control. The opposite of what was done here and in O'side. In those instances, the gun actually made the situation worse. These ODO's should face a higher level of accountability and their "brothers" should demand higher standards or they risk losing the trust of the public. At the very least, all off duty officers involved in firing their guns should have immeidate mandatory drug&alcohol testing. What possible reason, in the interest of justice, is there NOT to test them?!?

Eric wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:48 AM:First, I think that any off-duty officer who intends to drink should safely store his or her firearm so that it is not readily available, for obvious reasons.

Second, I think that anyone who has such an attitude towards police officers that they don't trust them should make sure that they don't call them when the bad guys arrive. They certainly wouldn't want anyone to call them a hypocrite.

BAC on Police Officer wrote on Apr 18, 2008 11:08 AM:What difference does the guy's BAC make? The shooting was determined to be justified. How would a couple of beers change the fact that he was beat to within an inch of his life? Self-defense is self-defense.

To Please wrote on Apr 18, 2008 12:25 PM: "A man lost his life; a son lost his father; a mother lost her son; siblings lost their brother; a girlfriend is left alone and broken hearted; and friends have lost a friend. Don't let this happen to anyone else."

Ya, Vilan didn't stop to think about the pain he would cause his family and friends by making a habit of assaulting people. The article clearly states that he was on parole for a prior assault. Lets put the blame where it belongs.

Another thing: "Why wasn't a BAC done on the ODO?" let's say the ODO had been drinking and let's say he was really wasted. He probably would have been too drunk to even pull his weapon out in a timely manner to stop the beatings. People who are drunk tend to have a slower reflex. My guess: It was highly likely that he was totally sober and that's what kept him alive.

Bottom Line wrote on Apr 18, 2008 1:29 PM:I trust police officers to do their job, just like everyone else. If you're saying "I shouldn't call them when the bad guys arrive" aren't you implying that they can pick and choose how to act accordingly? Well, maybe they chose to defend this ODO when his actions should have been scrutinized a bit more closely.

BAC on Officer wrote on Apr 18, 2008 1:33 PM:What difference would a couple of beers or wine tasting do? Let's see... quick to anger, over reacting, slapping the wrong bottom, imparied judgement, heated verbal exchanges and oh yea, shooting five times.

Cops are good vilans are bad wrote on Apr 18, 2008 2:38 PM:I have a good friend who is in law enforement. He carries his gun with him while off duty. I'm glad he does. Living in Riverside county there is a good chance he is going to run into some vilan that he has put behind bars. When he does, he's going to need his gun.

Concerned wrote on Apr 18, 2008 3:21 PM:This hole thing has made me not trust the people who are suppose to "serve and protect" us. I use to tell my kids that if they were scared and there was a cop around, to go to them. But now, I would never tell them to. I have realized that cops are only there to "protect and serve their own" not everyone, even though I contribute to their salary. The fact that he was not given a BAC test is outrageous!
He smacked another woman’s butt he claimed was his wife…did he not remember what his wife was wearing or what she looked like or if his wife had tattoos covering her entire back (like the woman’s butt he smacked did)???
Also, he shot a man as he (Taylor) was running away. He was shot in the butt and the back of the shin. How is that protecting himself? The man was running away. How come there are no mentions of the off duty officer’s friends? He had two with him outside when the fight happened.
Whenever there is a police shooting it should be looked at even closer than just a civilian shooting and this investigation was over in only one month. It just doesn’t seem right. I will contribute by writing a letter to the DA so hopefully this killer can get off our streets and in jail where he belongs.

Concerned-1 wrote on Apr 18, 2008 4:42 PM:Sounds like "Concerned" has some insights to this event. Still doesn't change my opinion. Justice was served, except for the prosecution of the other thugs involved. Again, this element has to learn the hard way how to get along with others.

Cops Held in high Regard? Please! wrote on Apr 18, 2008 4:54 PM:I don't understand why Cops testimony should be held in high reguard. Every experience I have had with police officers since I played boys base ball as an eight year old has shown me that police officers lie out of both sides of their mouth at the same time.

If I ever serve on a Jury in Riverside County. I awill assume that the Police Officer is a lier and has embelished their police report.

It may seem unfair, but being in the legal profession I have had a lot of experience with police officers in Riverside County and they have earned their poor reputation honestly.

I worked for one company for eight years that had a great reputation for integrity. As an employee of that company I shared that reputation for honesty. It is the same way with police officers every individual officer shares the reputation of the entire department. In general the RCSO have a reputation for dishonesty and being elitest that are above the law. The many blogs in this paper from RCSD proves it to me beoyond a shadow of a doubt.

This officer was not treated the same as the average citizen. He should have been held to a higher standard. With privaledge comes responsibility

esteban wrote on Apr 18, 2008 6:07 PM:To "cops held in high regard"...How many times have you been locked up? you? Integrity? Puuuuleeeeze! No one buys your BS. And working with the public defenders office doesn't qualify your opinions for squat!

KB wrote on Apr 18, 2008 6:19 PM:To Please and Concerned, a BAC was given to the ODO, I think you two have this confused with the Oceanside shooting.

Cop bashers wrote on Apr 18, 2008 6:27 PM:Quit whinning. Vilan and his crew picked the wrong guy to fight with and they paid for it dearly. As for the guy shot in the butt and shin, how ling wo you think it takes a person to turn around? How about less than a second. The officer was attacked by a GROUP of men. He was hit in the HEAD with a metal chair. Then after being struck with a deadly weapon, identifying himself, and under attack by at least 6 assailants did he draw his gun and fire. Law enforcement officers may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to another person. Generic deadly force policy that officers follow. It seems reasonable based on the circumstances that the officer acted the way he did. Too bad for the attackers. Post this NCTimes, you didn't post it at lunch.

Roberto1 wrote on Apr 18, 2008 7:14 PM:I is now acceptable behaviour to swat the bottom of females in Riverside County. This precedent setting example proves this is an acceptvle behaviour.

so cynical wrote on Apr 18, 2008 7:31 PM:some of you seem so cynical towards law enforcement. funny, I used to dislike cops. then one day, I decided to get my life together, quite abusing my self and others around me. Slowly my attitude towards the police changed. I realized that it was my attitude that needed to change, not the cops.
Sadly, cops are humans too. Some of them even make mistakes or even act criminally. Its pretty rare but it does not happen that much. Most folks with problems with the cops usually have done something to make the cops react. Of course we are great at criticizing others but our own bad behavior is a blind spot for us.
If you dislike the police, make some real changes. join the voluntter police or even become a cop and make a difference instead of complaining.

call me naive wrote on Apr 18, 2008 7:44 PM:I just don't see the cops being dishonest or acting with out integrity. I don't see how they could. We can open critize them on blogs like this and their are plenty of journalists that love to seek out corruption and sleaze. None of that has ever been substanciated in any of the articles i have read. i have only see inuendo and acusations but no facts.
if there is a conspiracy or corruption or anything underhanded don't you think someone could prove it? c'mon, if we uncovered bad behavior in Iraqi prisons it seems like it would be pretty easy to catch the bad cops right here is old town. After all, as many critics point out, cops are not the smartest segment of our society but somehow they manage to always do evil and get away with it.
Is it because they are really smarter than the conspiracy buffs or is it that the are mostly good folks trying to do the right thing?

Occam's razor wrote on Apr 18, 2008 8:17 PM:Occam's razor states that the simplest answer is probably the correct one. We have 2 scenarios.

scenario 1.
A cop gets drunk in a restuarant that has receipts showing his table only order 2 drinks, intentionally slaps a complete stranger. Pretends to be sick, goes out side and baits a group of guys into a fight, so he can murder them. His blood lust is so strong that he is willing to give up his home, career and family. Also, cops from a completely different city are willing to risk their own careers to cover for a complete stranger.

Scenario 2:
The cop accidentally or intentionally slaps this woman. Her friends, who may or may not have been drinking, take offense. her friend is a convicted felon who did time for violent crimes and making rash decisions. The former felon or his friend assaults the officer with a chair after an argument. They did not know he was armed, so they felt they had the advantage of numbers.

If we apply Occam's razor, the most likely scenario would be that the person who has a history of acting violently and impulsively made one more rash decision that got him into trouble.

It would be good if we knew more about the officer's history. since no one published any reports of complaints or behavioral problems in the past month or so, it is probably safe to assume that he does not have a history of this sort of behavior.
the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.

People Haters wrote on Apr 18, 2008 8:42 PM:I once worked with a guy for five years. This guy could never get along with people and the company eneded up fireing him because of it. He became an RCSD.

Another boy that I watched grow up also could not get along with his peers and showed contempt for most people. He is now working for the Murrieta Police Department.

Bottom Line wrote on Apr 18, 2008 10:36 PM:Riverside County Sheriff Department and particularly, Southwest Justice Center, where this incident was investigated has a reputation for dishonesty and incompetence. Ask any defense lawyer. They hide evidence, are difficult to work with, etc. etc. Maybe with Rod Pacheco they are trying to change the image.

to Bottom Line wrote on Apr 19, 2008 6:30 AM:That is such a lie.
RV county justice system employs thousands of people. To say they are all dishonest is like saying people of a certain race or background are all criminals.
C'mon. If the problems were are bad as you say, wouldn't there be tons of evidence?
RV sherriff and police deal with some terrible and dishonest people all day every day.
Did you ever think that the folks that are on the other side of the legal system are not making it easy for law enforcement? RV county has the Crips, Bloods, MS13 among other gangs. We have some of the worst criminals in the world right here and you want our law enforcement to make it easy for these criminals?
Of course the police and DA are dificult to work with. Its a under staffed, under pair beaucracy that deals with societys' lowest and meanest characters. Do they make mistakes some times? sure. But all the folks that I have been involved with are just people trying to do a very scary job in world very different from yours and mine. These people show up every day and work with the mentally ill, people with anger issues, people filled with hate for everyone and everything. People that murder children and cook poisons like meth to sell to our kids. And you critize them because they are "difficult" to work with. Please check to see how many officers are killed every day in the line of duty in CA. At SW justice center, the place deals with some people who are so bad that the people assigned to defend them need to get escorts to thier cars at night.
Spend a night or two in lock up with some of the residents at SW justice center. I think you might change your tune.
BTW... I don't work for RVC. I am a private citizen who actually does not try to get out of jury duty.
Wanna get a reality check, offer to volunteer for the publice defenders officer for a few weeks.
I want to make it clear to RV and Murr and Temecula PD. Many of us know the awful things you see every day. You may not be heroes but you are the closest thing we have to it is a harsh world.
To PDs everywhere. My family and I support. Don't let statements like this guy's distract your from your jobs.
Thank you.

to People Haters wrote on Apr 19, 2008 6:43 AM:so what? I have 6 or so friends/neighgbors tht are PD. They are decent guys trying to raise their families and get by in the world. I work with people alot and make a living reading and understanding people. I see no malice or comtempt in an of the folks I know. They are just guys like you and me. they jusst happen to get into a careers where total strangers criticize their every move all day long. The cops I know, volunteer in the schools their kids attend, they coach little league and soccer and the help raise money for sick & dying kids in our community.
Cops are people first. Doing a job that would make most of us cry and seek therapy if we had to do it.

MojaveJIm wrote on Apr 19, 2008 7:12 AM:Gary, The truth of the matter is that anyone else except for an armed cop would have been beaten to death by the chair.
I just wished I had the same right to carry as he did (like I used to have before I moved to the left coast).

John from Temecula wrote on Apr 19, 2008 8:22 AM:To Roberto 1: Check your spelling. You are killing me!

To Cops held in high regard:
Please disclose your feelings about cops being liars during the Voir Dire process of jury selection. You will never see a juror's seat in your life.

Bottom Line wrote on Apr 19, 2008 8:27 AM:I did not write that comment. I do not think investigators are dishonest or hide evidence.

To: people haters wrote on Apr 19, 2008 9:31 AM:Have you ever been through the intense psychological evaluation required to become a cop? How about the intense background screening?
You don't just become an RCSD officer. Most people can't get past the above evaluations.
I believe these experts qualified to make the determination for hire of these individuals. What are your qualifications to determine this?

mona wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:25 AM:There was another off duty shooting in oceanside a women and her [8] year boy ware shot the cops are to stressed and under paid and we the people are suffering because of it

Ditto wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:32 AM:I like how people comment on speculation and fear. The facts have been presented, everything else is merely a conspiracy theroy.

to bottom line wrote on Apr 19, 2008 11:02 AM:RV legal system employees hundreds, if not thousands or people. are you saying they are all dishonest and corrupt? These people that you hold in such low regards show up every day to deal with bloods, crips, MS13, any other gang wannabees, child murderers, thieves, the violently mentally ill and people who make their living swndling and cheating others out of their hard earned savings. they deal with people abuse the elderly and steal from homeless people.
So, why exactly would our understaffed, underpaid beaucracy want to make life less difficult for people that commit so many horrible crimes?
As for dishonesty and corruption, the RV justice system is a big organization, there would be whistleblowers and watch dog groups dragging them into court if it is as bad as you claim.
Quite frankly, it is easy to critize law enforcement from the outside, but I think that you should walk a mile in their shoes. I am not an RV employee, just a private citizen. My business monitors businesses networks for fraud and abuse so I only deal with "white collar" criminals and these are scary people.
I support law enforcement. I have sat on enough juries to see first hand what they deal with every day.
The police officers I do know are little league coachs, volunteers at schools, husbands and fathers trying to get by in a hard world.
It is easy to complain but you would really impress me if you actually got off your but and spent some time volunteering or working to improve the justice system.
Spend a few days with the folks that the cops and DA deal with and you may just change mind about our legal system.
RV sherriffs, PD and DA. Keep up the good work. some of us appreciate your efforts.

to Roberto1 wrote on Apr 19, 2008 11:07 AM:It is not acceptable to swat someone on the butt. If it was hard enough to inflict injury, it is assault. Assault is a criminal matter. Vilan & Willis should have encouraged their friend to press charges. They had no right to put hands on any one. you can complain about the cops but, if this was assault on the woman, her duty was to press charges not instigate a fight.

to Bottom Line wrote on Apr 19, 2008 11:14 AM:This is not really the bottom line. Of course defense lawyers will complain that the DA is not going to make their job easier. It's a defense lawyers job, duty and obligation to make the DA's job harder. That is why we call it an adversarial system.
The DA has no obligation to make life easy for criminals. Making the legal system difficult to work with encourages our society to mind it's manners and avoid committing crimes. If you don't like our legal system, it is pretty easy to avoid it. Me, for example, I have a personal policy to NOT get involved with criminal activity. Pretty simple. don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

to People Haters wrote on Apr 19, 2008 11:26 AM:I know several officers here in Murr-town and in other states. all of the ones I know are husbands and fathers trying to get by like the rest of us. I see them volunteering at the kids schools and coaching soccer teams and involved with raising money for charities. Oh yeah, they also deal with the sickest, most violent segment of our society on a day to day basis.
So, I have to repsectfully disagree with your conclusion based on a sample of 2 officers in county that employees hundreds of officers.
My experience tells me that most cops and just working stiffs like you and me trying to raise their families and pay their bills. I don't see them as violent miscreant with behavioral problems. I did grow up in a neighborhood that had a pretty high crime rate. There were many civilians in that neighborhood that committed violent crimes, stole from thier neighbors, robbed strangers, dealt drugs. Funny, none of those people were cops. These same people often complained how law enforcement was bad to them. Maybe it is because the cops made their criminal activity less profitable. Think about it, is it the cops that need to change or don't our citizens have a duty to be decent human beings?

Concerned Mother wrote on Apr 19, 2008 11:27 AM:Geeze People. The Police Officer was attacked 6 on 1. I am going to get a license for a concealed weapon because If I am ever attacked even 1 on 1 I have the right to shoot in my own self-defense. Stop hating the Cops that protect and Serve our community everyday. Try walking in their shoes on day. And respect their right to defend themselves so that they can continue to protect and serve you another day on the job.

Roberto1 wrote on Apr 19, 2008 1:40 PM:If the cop hit this woman as hard as some say he did then it is assault. The woman should have pressed charges. Vilan and Willis could have testified against the cop if it was actually assault. Dibble had no right to put his hands on another person. If he did intentional and actually hurt her, then she should have called the cops. It did not give Vilan and willis the right to escalate the situation. Instead they should have called the police. I doubt that he hit her hard enough to enflict more than bruise, which is still wrong, but probably would not have been enough to get anyone arrested. Especially if if the guy apologized and she accepted it at the time it happened.
yes, a slap on the but is wrong but the appropriate response is not more/escalated violence. Old Town Temecula had lots of cops there. One could have come if the woman requested it. If Dibbble had done something wrong, they could have made him leave. Instead, vilan and willis decided that fighting was the right response. Clearly, if my wife was slapped on the butt in public and the guy was a jerk I would have complained to the restuarant management. If it got worse, I would have called a cop. do see my point?
The response to the slap was innappropriate. Choose the law, not vigilantism. If Vilan and Willis had pressed charges instead of fighting, Vilan would probably be alive today.
all of my above arguments makes the assumption that the slap on the butt was deliberate and caused injury. I do not really think is was deliberate based on what I read. Vilan and willis over reacted and chose a inappropriate response which escalated the situation to a grave consequence.

to Bottom Line wrote on Apr 19, 2008 1:46 PM:wow! bottom line, looks like that guy took you to task. Feel silly now?

to BAC on Officer wrote on Apr 19, 2008 1:52 PM:The restuarant's receipts only show 2 alcoholic drinks being ordered by dibble's party. He was having dinner with him family, not knocking back shot with his friends. no other businesses in Old Town have reported that they served him drinks or that he seemed intoxicated. Seems to me if he was drunk then someone would have noticed it. I worked in a bar in college and the drunk obnoxious troublemakers were obvious to everyone in the bar. yet, I see no statements that either vilan or the officers acted drunk.

ChulaJuana wrote on Apr 19, 2008 2:11 PM:Motto of the story: Never bring a chair to a gunfight.

drew wrote on Apr 19, 2008 2:30 PM:Based on several of the statements made here, am I to assume that if I have any alcohol in my system, I have to give up the right to defend myself if I am attacked? that does not seem right to me.
Shouldn't the attackers be held to the same standard? If we find out the Willis had alcohol in his system does that change how the police should proceed against him? will he get a stiffer sentence just because he had alcohol in his system?

Roberto1 wrote on Apr 19, 2008 6:18 PM:Motto to the story is groping woman in public is now legal in Temecula. Since the BAC of the off duty officer in involved is unknown...on can only assume if he was in fact sober and groped this woman, he should be held accountable for his part.

Barney wrote on Apr 19, 2008 7:03 PM:You know it is OK to look critically at this situation and question the motives and handling of this case. To do so does not necessarily persecute the ODO, or denounce LE in general. I refuse to live in fear and suck up to authority. I employ them and I have the right to question and use my own mind. That does not mean I do not appreciate the job they do. On the flip side I expect them to appreciate the jobs we do. Many of us have jobs that are statistically far more dangerous then they do, and we are not emotional basket cases that could not possibly pass the "rigorous" hurdles they overcame to get to their profession.
So please let us use our heads, be critical for the sake of getting closer to the truth, without persecuting anyone.
And please, please, stop the sucking up to authority, mindless diatribe of praise and adoration.

to barney wrote on Apr 19, 2008 8:12 PM:It is not only our right, it is our duty to question authority. Government must always be kept in check. In this case, I just don't see any facts that the police or this officer did anything inappropriate or illegal. If you have FACTS to the contrary, please let us know.
I don't practice mindless adoration of anyone but I do appreciate those that go into public service. Most of us don't really have the capacity to do that type of work. As for others with danderous jobs, the market bears those jobs so you probably make more for performing a more hazardous job. police and firemen are not payed more based on sales figures or some achievable business goal. They do a dangerous job without the bonuses for overachieving. private sector jobs that are dangerous are paid for from the profit of successful businesses which they use to compensate employees for high risk tasks with higher rate of pay.
Most of us don't have to deal with the dangerously mentally ill or the raging meth freak. A private sector dangerous job, like sword fishing, can be adjusted for employee safety. If the seas are too dangerous, the boats can stay in port. where as a policeman must respond to a dangerous situation. It is their job to deal bad situations. They don't have the luxury of waiting for a storm to pass.
So it is not mindless praise. Those on this blog should not make unsubstantiated accusations of police corruption unless they can back it up with fact. If someone has actual facts that someone from our government as committed a wrong doing they should be held accountable. In this case, NO ONE has backed up any accusations with any witnesses or evidence. That is why I am so critical of those that make blanket statements like SW Riverside justice system is corrupt. If it is, please provide substantiate facts not emotion or inuendo.

to roberto1 wrote on Apr 19, 2008 8:15 PM:Again, if the ODO "assaulted" this woman, shouldn't the appropriate respond be to file charges? After all no one knew he was a cop until the shooting started.

to roberto1 wrote on Apr 19, 2008 8:30 PM:Dibble could have been held accountable if the incident would have been reported BEFORE the shooting. Of course, it was more fun for Vilan and Willis to smack him around instead of pressing charges. If vilan and willis had followed the law and call the cops instead of taking matters into thier own hands, things would probably be quite a bit different for them today. My guess is that Willis will be charged for assault. Funny thing is, if he had kept his cool and done the smart thing, it would be the cop defending himself in court. I doubt the slap on the bottom warranted an assault charge, especially if the injuries were minor. The officer could have been hauled before a review board for bad behavior and this put on his job record. Since he was off duty, he wasn't acting an agent of the department so unless he really whacked her enough to send her to the doctor or emergency room, there would not have been much to her case.
Don't make the situation worse by fighting, we have legal remedy for assault.

Barney wrote on Apr 19, 2008 8:42 PM:-To Barney-
Did I suggest I had any facts, or make accusations of any kind? And I agree with you it is our right to question and be critical, and we can do this without being disrespectful. You seem somehow upset with my post and I do not see why. I think this is a sensitive situation and deserves our scrutiny. I know the DA's office will decide how much to pursue it, but in some sense we have an institution trying to regulate and 'police' itself, so it behooves us to pay close attention. I have not personally, in no posts, suggested or claimed any specific wrongdoing. What I object to is the character assassination of those of us posting or who may have questions on either side of this argument.
As to your suggestion of private sector compensation, take a look at the stats for professions and you will see many are not very well paying, and police work is relatively safe work compared to many jobs. That being said, I am sure it is not easy work, and I know it is difficult to deal, on a daily basis, with some segments of society. However, their career choice nor mine, has any bearing on the critical analyses of situations like these, in fact anyone engaging in character bashing or over reaching generalizations is, well for lack of a better term, just a 'Barney'

Cops get away with anything and everything!!! wrote on Apr 19, 2008 9:14 PM:Why bother?

to roberto1 wrote on Apr 19, 2008 9:29 PM:I think you mean moral not motto, right?

folks who have been drinking enough to effect their behavior is pretty obvious. Even if the cop had a beer or three, it does not mean anything if he was hit from behind with a chair. Until Willis and Vilan started swinging, it was just a couple of guys arguing in the street. I don't know about you, but my old man taught me never to argue with a drunk. it's not worth it.
Besides, the waiter from the restuarant stated that Dibble's party had 1 beer and 1 wine with dinner. That hardly is evidence that the officer was drunk and out of control.
What matters is who started the fight. Even if the cop tried to verbally provoke vilan and Willis, they could have done what a smart person does in these situations. Walk Away.
If I meet you on the street & I am sloppy drunk, slap your mom's bottom and call you every rotten name in the book, you still cannot touch me, no matter what I say to you. theoretically you could hit me if you suspected I was going to continue to hit your mom's fanny. Since some time passed between the first slap and the altercation outside, there was no immediate threat. Freedom of speech ends where your fist meets my nose. Whom ever hit first and who ever used the weapon, in this case, a chair, was guilty of assault and maybe more. Once you start swinging, I have the right to defend myself. Since we have no "duty to retreat" in this country (like they do in England) I can take what ever steps are necessary to end the assault against me. For example, if your mom had been out at a bar, had too much to drink, even called me names and I tried to rape her or hurt her, she could still defend herself, even kill me, if that is what it took to ensure her own safety.
You see, in the legal matter of self defense, the victim's sobriety is not even a factor in the law books. BAC for law enforcement officers involved shootings is a policy in some states and counties but not in RV. There was no legal precendent to require it. Going forward, if you want BAC to be a requirement for off duty officers, work with your local legislators to get it on the books. Since they do it in other states, it should not be impossible to make it a law. I think we should have BAC and drug testing for lots of things. it's probably a good idea. We should definitely perform BAC on all assault victims. If they are intoxicated it could mitigate some circumstances. In the theoretical case of your mom's assault, her intoxication could lead to the conclusion that she was "looking for it" when assaulted, thus freeing her assailant. sounds pretty good to me. But, what do I know, I am not a lawyer.

to barney wrote on Apr 19, 2008 9:57 PM:I am not upset by your posts. I value the the first amendment and this
forum is a valuable part of our society. We should hash out matters
like this in a passionate debate. Better here than in a dark alley.
I don't think I turned to "bashing" until I felt it was necessary to
balance the unsubstanciated negative comments about law enforcement. As
you can see from my previous posts, I want folks to back up accusations
with facts.
I actually enjoy these arguments. It does make me take a harder look at
my own view points. I tend to lean toward supporting law enforcement
since i have had mostly positive experiences with them. I have also
known a couple of violent felons. I saw several repeatedly make bad choices that got someone hurt. I have never seen that behavior, so far, in the LE folks I know. My anecodotal evidence tells me that violent felons have some compulsion to commit more violence. Since I know a few cops around town and had a family friend who was a detective, I never witnessed or heard of them committing an unprovoked violent act.
While it may not be fair to say people never change, there is a lot of evidence that states that recidivism rates are quite high among felons. the unsubstanciate accusations of corruption in our legal system do upset me. I feel that they take away from the times when our legal system and our government actually do cause harm. We need to hold our government accountable but the only way we can do that is if we have proof, evidence, facts and real witnesses to this wrong doing. Anthing else is just spreading rumors and its not productive.
Please, continue keep me honest. I will try to keep the bashing to a minimum. thank you.

to Cops get away with anything and everything!!! wrote on Apr 19, 2008 10:00 PM:don't be silly. Corrupt cops are found and proscuted quite frequently. Just google it, you will find a few cases. The system will never change if you don't even try to make a difference. New York city had a few high profile cases just a couple of years ago.

Roberto1 wrote on Apr 20, 2008 7:35 AM:Groping is assault and this case escalated to a death. Go ahead and prosecute the officer for assault, Im sure that's what the corrupt riverside DA's office is thinking.

to roberto1 wrote on Apr 20, 2008 8:35 AM:I am not sure a slap on the tushy meets the legal burden for assault. Depends on his intent and how much injury he caused. I definitely know it does not require that a man take a beating in public for it.
It was the woman's responsibility to press charges. She had no idea he was a cop until after things were all over. She could have stepped outside the restuarant and found a cop in 5 minutes.
Vilan and Willis blew it when they chose violence over the law. Instead of brawling they should have called a cop. I bet they both had cell phones on them.

to Roberto1 wrote on Apr 20, 2008 8:36 AM:It dd escalate to a death. that is why we should use the law and not take matters into our own hands.

vilan's attorneys wrote on Apr 20, 2008 9:02 AM:Vilan's attorney has/had the opportunity to interview the same witnesses as the police and the DA. He has the opportunity to read the interviews the police took. He has the right and the duty to seek out additional evidence and witnesses.
So far, he has been very quiet in the press. Either he is being prudent and waiting until the DA acts or he has found nothing to coborate the family's side of the story.

to roberto1 wrote on Apr 20, 2008 9:07 AM:You keep saying the riverside DA & RSO are corrupt. Please enlighten us with your evidence to this statement.
RSO and DA employ thousands of people. An organization that big would have to have at least one whistleblower in it.

shadows of ghosts wrote on Apr 20, 2008 10:27 AM:Roberto1 - your statements are all shadows of ghosts. You say things like RSO is corrupt & DA is corrupt but it's all just conspiracy theory stuff. No meat to your allegations.

Consider for a moment, that the officer, who has no complaints on his record or or record of disciplinary action or a criminal record, made an honest mistake when he slapped this woman. Is that possible?
Is it possible that Vilan and Willis, insensed because someone touched one of thier women, overreacted to the situation?
Is it possible? That the cop, who does not have a criminal record, intended no malice towards this woman?
Is it possible that it was a harmless mistake and that Vilan and Willis overreacted? Is it possible?

esteban wrote on Apr 21, 2008 9:02 AM:Attention anticops...Dibble did no wrong and will be exonerated. Vilan did do wrong and was punished for it. Now deal with it, all your arguments made NO SENSE!

Curious wrote on Apr 21, 2008 3:24 PM:To KB:

The man was NOT tested by the RCSD, he was tested by hs own dept. who knows how long after the incident.. and those results havew not been released...

Bluntdog wrote on Apr 21, 2008 4:45 PM:Are some of you people blind and, or can not read! A BAC was conducted! THIS IS STANDARD POLICY throughout the state of California and is mandated by the State Attorney General's Office. There's NO getting around it, hiding the results or pretending to take a blood sample, but for some of you "Conspiracy Theorist," you can believe whatever you want! BAC makes no difference when you're gettin' a beat down. All you can think of is LIVING! I've been there! Vilan should have brought a gun to a gunfight instead of stupidity and arrogance!

Roberto1 wrote on Apr 21, 2008 6:59 PM:Groping a woman in Temecula is acceptable behaviour. Groping by accident i.e. telling the woman you thought her behind look familiar is also acceptable...get real you clowns!

to Roberto1 wrote on Apr 21, 2008 10:51 PM:Who ever said it was acceptable? What is the appropriate response? What should have Dibble's punishment been for slapping this woman?

To Bluntdog wrote on Apr 22, 2008 4:43 PM:For your information a BAC was not conducted on the officer by Riverside County Sheriffs Dept. He did however recieve a blood test from Orange County...but days later. The RCSD said "we don't typically preform a BAC test on a victim". How can they come to a conclusion on who the victim is without conducting a thourough investigation? I smell cover up

Roberto wrote on Apr 22, 2008 5:43 PM:To Roberto1
REPLY: Lets see this escalated to the death of a human being. Last I checked groping an individual in public is an assault...it too smell a cover up....Where is the overcharging, makes false charges looking for a plea bargain corrupt riverside DA now?

Fault Ratio wrote on Apr 22, 2008 5:54 PM:Purhapse we should asign fault like the insurance companies do. 25% for Dibble 75% to the others.

to roberto wrote on Apr 23, 2008 9:46 AM:Please re-read your post. It is not clear what you are trying to say.
The woman could have pressed charges at any time. She still can.
I still see no EVIDENCE of coverup. Please include proof of DA or PD wrongdoing in your next post. Thanks!
If the woman would have called the police and pressed charges, then don't you think the PD would have intervened & diffused the situation. Instead her friends took the law into thier own hands.

To Bluntdog wrote on Apr 23, 2008 9:50 AM:Independant witnesses on the street that saw Vilan and Willis strike first coberated the ODO's story. It was from actual eye witnesses statements that led to this conclusion, not a sinister coverup from the evil empire.
That is why the family's lawyer has not been screaming about lawsuits in the press. He knows the truth. he has been able to interview witnesses and get the whole story.

po-TAY-to po-TOT-o wrote on Apr 23, 2008 4:03 PM:boberto keeps saying that RSO and RV DA are corrupt, yet he offers NO proof.
What he calls corruption, I call damn fine lawyerin'. Prosecuting the laws of our state with vigor and determination to reduce crime in our county is not corruption. Its a manadate from law abiding citizens. We are so sick of crime and we finally have the tools to make a real difference in our communities.
Since everyone is aware that our DA is a heartless SOB (or competent public servant, depending on who you ask), then the playing field is even.
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Roberto wrote on Apr 23, 2008 7:30 PM:Yeah, He refuses to prosecute public groping of females that result in death...I call it damm fine Lie-ering.
Need proof of corruption?...go google it yourself, your a big girl and I'm sure you can figure it out.

Amen Brother wrote on Apr 23, 2008 8:10 PM:To Po-TAY-to

Thank-you....Thank-you!!!
I for one, am so sick of these vicious attacks that I've heard about, read about or have seen on T,V.
As a community we need to put an end to this heartless violence!!! These thugs don't have a conscious. I think Dibble was only fortunate about one thing that night...that he was able to defend himself!

to roberto wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:18 PM:I don't need proof find the proof for you. You are the guy making false accusations. If you can't even bring it to a public blog, I guess it is not too important to you. Personally,I think think the DA is a swell guy. If I ever got to meet him, I would buy him a steak.
Where did it say he refused to press charges on this woman's behalf? Did she even bother to file a complaint or did she just have her pals beat up the so-called "offender"?
The alleged slap happened an hour before shooting. She had plenty of time to call a cop. Vilan and Willis could have subdued him until a cop came instead of cracking his skull. After all, they came up from behind on him (cowardly). they could have made a citizen's arrest.
Willis and Vilan could have retreated. She could have pressed charges. Other choices could have been made.
PS. If the DA is really a bad buy, the ACLU crowd will intervene.

to roberto wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:25 PM:I am very dissappointed. You won't even take the time to back up your allegations. Guess you will never stop the evil DA if you can't find anyone who will back up your x-files campaign. I say again, you bring no proof or evidence.
BTW, a disgruntled defense attorney doesn't count. Defense attorneys always complain that DA's making them work for their money by actually making them come up with plausible arguments. DAs and defense attorneys are supposed to work against eachother. Its part of the process.
Oh yeah. Criminal defendants NEVER lie. I read that on the internet. We all know that everything on the internet is completely true.

to boberto wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:33 PM:resorting to name calling instead of actually giving a credible argument? Kinda weak, isn't it?

roberto was right wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:44 PM:I did take the time to "google" corruption involving the DA's office in RV county.
I found 1 - count 'em - ONE case from 1995. Yep, it is all other the web. 13 years ago the DA's office was accused of corruption.
Roberto - nicely done. You have exposed corruption in the DA's office. You should get a pulitzer! Atta boy! Keep up the good work!

Roberto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 3:42 PM:Its assualt, groping a female in a public is not acceptable anywhere else except in Temecula.

To Berto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 3:48 PM:Sounds like you are the one who got slapped in the butt, by all the intelligent folks blogging.

Roberto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 5:01 PM:Well, I give up...the moderator has obviously stopped me from reponding to googgless...lol!
Meanwhile Back at the subject: Six people waated to beat this Cop up for slapping a female on the butt yet the DA and the neighbourhood vigalantes see nothing wrong here. And they say we think were Macho!

to roberto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 5:24 PM:Crimes need to be report. SHE, the "alleged" victim, needed to CALL a cop! Not have her little boyfriends get all "West Side Story".
If she would have called the cops instead, things would be very different today.

vigilantes wrote on Apr 24, 2008 5:32 PM:Vilan and Willis attacked this guy for allegedly "assaulting" thier lady friend, right? They basically took the law into their own hands. Isn't that the very definition of a vigilante?

the slap wrote on Apr 24, 2008 5:50 PM:Actually, I do think that the slap was wrong. But given the context of it being a mistake and that he apologized, it seems to me that Vilan and Willis overreacted the situation. If the slap was indeed as hard as Vilan's family claims then maybe it could meet the criteria for assault. While a slap on the tushy can be very painful, rarely does it cause permanent harm, especially given the context that he thought it was a woman he knew. While it may have been inappropriate, I do not think the correct response was to hit a man with a chair. If he was such a threat, they could have surrounded him and made him wait for the police to arrive. Since the attacked him from behind, they could have simply restrained him until help arrived. Or, they could have simply walked away. I know my wife would have insisted on the last option from me. Any direct confrontation with a tota stranger in a tense situation is irresponsible.
I am not happy that Dibble shot this guy but I am also very concerned about this "gangster" attitude among our young people that insist the smallest slight be dealt with in a violent fashion instead of a) walking away or b) pressing charges.
I see Roberto's concern that the DA has not pressed charges and that he thinks we find the "slap" acceptable.
Just because no charges have been in the press, does not mean their won't be. Also, it was a slap with an open hand on a woman he thought he knew and he apologized. It may not be enough to qualify legally as assault. If he had hit her with malice and caused injury beyond a red mark or bruise, it may be a bigger factor.
Was the cop dumb for slapping the butt of a woman he did not know? Of course it was. Did it give Vilan and Willis justification to attack him with a blunt object from behind? I don't think that was an appropriate response. The difference here is this: the woman may have had her skin sting for up to 30 minutes. The other guy had to get stitches. The response was out of proportion to the situation.

whos macho wrote on Apr 24, 2008 6:07 PM:To roberto, when you say "And they say we think were Macho!"
Who do you mean by "we"?

Roberto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 6:23 PM:good point.."vigilantes"
Butt, two wrongs are still two wrongs and groping a female which led to a death should also be punished to the extent of the law allowed butt, that won't ever happen due to the no alcohol or drug test or concern about the attitude of the other vigilantes. Accountibility for his action (the off duty officer) if wasn't for the poerful officers unions, we ouldn't be having this discussion.

to roberto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 7:38 PM:Assaults charges are not contingent on BAL or drug test results. That statement makes no sense.

You jump from the slap (it was a slap not a grope, see the first article) to death. There were several actions between the initial incident and the shooting. You make a leap in logic that draws a straight line from a minor insult or possible assault to death as if Vilan and Willis made no decisions in this incident.
What is the appropriate punishment for the slap? Was it appropriate to hit him with a chair?
You keep saying the powerful police union or the DA or RSO but the woman nor Vilan nor Willis gave the system a chance to work.
What is the appropriate accountability for the slap on a bottom? It barely meets the criteria for a criminal act. I still say that even if Dibble hit her with the intent to cause injury, she should have pressed charges. It was just a guy and a group of people in a disagreement and NO ONE knew he was a cop until it was over.
Clearly, if this woman felt she had been assaulted why did she not call the police? The 2 incidents were an hour apart. She had ample time to call a cop and press charges.
Seriously, you don't really think the cop should have been hit over the head for slapping someone's bottom?
Please, go to WestLaw on line law journal and see if there is a legal precendent for "hitting someone on the bottom" and see what the correct charge would be. You will see that it DEPENDS on several factors including intent. Drugs and alcohol don't factor into the statute at all. what if the woman had alcohol in her system? Does that negate her as a victim?
We are not vigilantes. We want justice. Vilan could have had a chance at justice through legal recourse if he had called the cop instead of taking violent action towards a stranger.

assault and battery wrote on Apr 24, 2008 7:49 PM:from a criminal defense attorney's website: Note the part about intending.

What Is An Assault?
An assault is an apparent attempt to inflict a bodily contact or injury on another person. An assault differs from a battery because there is no touching of the victim in an assault; a battery necessarily includes touching. For an assault to occur, the person charged with assault must have intended to make bodily contact or inflict injury on the person assaulted and must have had the apparent ability to do it. The attempt must be open and obvious in such a way that the person assaulted fears that he or she will be physically injured.

Based on this,I don't think the slap meets the criteria for assault or battery. IMHO

defense attorneys wrote on Apr 24, 2008 7:53 PM:From a different source based on criminal defense attorney's comments.

"Assault and battery" is a type of felonious assault. An incident that has had actual contact and resulted in the need for medical treatment is considered assault and battery. A simple assault is when a weapon is not used and the injuries caused by the assault are only minor. In order to constitute battery, an offense must be intentional and must be committed to inflict injury on another.

Be sure to read the last sentence of this statement on intent.

Roberto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 8:56 PM:The group with the assaulted female took the wrong course of action...If I go to Trafficula and start slapping womans bottoms I'm sure that since I don't carry a weapon someone would probably kick my a.. But since this was not the case, and groping woman is acceptable behaviour, he is authorized to conduct himself in this manner without any respect for woman in public.

to roberto wrote on Apr 24, 2008 9:13 PM:there are several websites of defense attorneys. These sights give pretty clear explanation of assault and battery.
Please see one of these sites like the one for gregory hill or earl carter or several others. I just searched on the assault and battery statute for california. I found several.
All of them talk about intent and injury. I am pretty sure once you read the legal definition, you will see the officer did not intend to hurt her AND he did not cause her injury requiring medical treatment. nor did he continue the battery after the initial contact.
Please take the time to read up on the subject BEFORE making firther statements.

Roberto wrote on Apr 25, 2008 8:21 PM:I guess I'm not allowed to repond...Anyways Groping a female is considered sexual assault.

the silence is all telling wrote on Apr 25, 2008 9:39 PM:To summarize.
1. No proof of corruption or wrong doing by RSO, DA or Police Union ever shown. Roberto nor google search turned up any proof or any other allegations.

2. No evidence that the officer's action reached a prosecutable level of criminality based on witness statements and review of legal definition of assault and battery.

3. BAC is not a legal factor in prosecuting assault and/or battery as defined by the statute as desribed by lawyers that defend criminals for a l