October 4, 2014
(TheAntiMedia) Beavercreek, Ohio – Activists from several organizations came together to show their support for John Crawford, a man killed by the Beavercreek Police Department while holding a pellet rifle inside of Wal-Mart. He apparently planned to purchase the BB gun.
A telephone call to 911 by a man who has repeatedly changed his story about the events led to officers being dispatched to Wal-mart. The department claims they were worried about an active shooter. Of course, even the least observant officer should have noticed as they barreled through the store that shoppers were not fleeing a gunman in panic. They were going about their shopping routines.
After finding Crawford, the officers told him to drop the BB gun, then immediately opened fire and killed him. Even if the rifle had been real, under Ohio state law, Crawford was not committing a crime. He certainly did not deserve a summary execution. He was reportedly on the phone with loved ones who listened in horror to Crawford’s last minutes. Elsewhere in the store, a woman suffered a heart attack because of police gunfire. She did not recover.
Despite video demonstrating the careless and reckless behavior of the officers, the Grand Jury has failed to indict, which has sparked outrage across the sleepy community. Even though the feds have decided to probe the event, locals who have seen officers get away with murder all across the country are not hopeful.
This is the second time Crawford’s killer has shot and killed someone. Officer Sean Williams shot and killed a retired Air Force Master Sergeant in 2010. Scott A. Brogli was gunned down despite being “too intoxicated to do anything.” Williams claimed that the man that was drunk on the floor jumped up and charged him with a knife. There were no witnesses other than members of the thin blue line. Unsurprisingly, the Grand Jury didn’t charge him then either. In the small community police department’s entire history, there have been two killings by officers. The same officer was the shooter in both instances.
Locals are aware of the officer’s reputation and posted a mock wanted poster of the cop.
Activists from Anonymous, Cop Block, Ohio Open Cary, and unaffiliated citizens from all races and walks of life joined together to express their sympathies and solidarity with the Crawford family. Those driving past the demonstration honked their horns in support. The driver of one vehicle with a “thin blue line” sticker extended his middle finger to the crowd. Many took the opportunity to demonstrate with firearms in support of Ohio’s open carry law. The law makes it legal to openly carry a firearm in the state. It should have saved young John Crawford, but officers were out for blood rather than justice. They made no attempt to assess the situation and were not acting in good faith to preserve law and order; they were attempting to be action heroes. In the end, their quest to be tacticool cost the lives of two innocent people.
It doesn’t matter what the Grand Jury says, the very fact that an officer made a mistake that cost two people their lives should be grounds to fire him. Unfortunately, Beavercreek PD is behaving just like the Grand Jury. The department is covering up for its employees at the expense of justice and the community’s faith in the police department. In the end, the only “punishment” William is likely to face is a taxpayer-funded paid leave. Citizens can cling to the fact that the “thin blue line” protected itself because they have such a dangerous job.
From 1791 to 2014 the Officer Down Memorial Page reports that not a single Beavercreek cop has been killed in the line of duty. In Beavercreek it is more dangerous to go to Wal-Mart than it is to be a cop. More accurately, it is more dangerous to have contact with Officer Sean Williams.
This article is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and TheAntiMedia.org. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to receive our latest articles.
Since you’re here…
…We have a small favor to ask. Fewer and fewer people are seeing Anti-Media articles as social media sites crack down on us, and advertising revenues across the board are quickly declining. However, unlike many news organizations, we haven’t put up a paywall because we value open and accessible journalism over profit — but at this point, we’re barely even breaking even. Hopefully, you can see why we need to ask for your help. Anti-Media’s independent journalism and analysis takes substantial time, resources, and effort to produce, but we do it because we believe in our message and hope you do, too.
If everyone who reads our reporting and finds value in it helps fund it, our future can be much more secure. For as little as $1 and a minute of your time, you can support Anti-Media. Thank you. Click here to support us