Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Ted Rall vs. the LAPD (and the L.A. Times): Whom Do You Believe?
My most recent contribution at PJ Media concerns the matter of Ted Rall, the leftist cartoonist/columnist whose work, until recently, appeared in the Los Angeles Times. Mr. Rall was dismissed from further service with the Times over his apparent embellishment of the facts surrounding a citation he received from an LAPD officer in 2001.
Mr. Rall claimed in a May op-ed in the Times that he was roughed up and handcuffed during the incident, which the officer recorded on audiotape. That tape, according to the LAPD and the Times, does not bear out Mr. Rall’s version of the events. Since his dismissal from the paper, Mr. Rall has taken to the website aNewDomain.net to present what in my opinion is a feeble defense, which can be summarized by saying it was the cops and not he who lied about the incident.
I’m keen to hear the thoughts of the Ricochetti on the matter, so please read the relevant pieces and weigh in here with your comments.
Published in General
Instapundit linked to your story and I read it. Rall sounds like a lying liar that lies. I commend the LA Times for being honest (for once) and getting rid of a bad character. Not all cops are bad. Most cops are decent. It’s the jerks that ruin it for the rest and unfortunately too many people are willing to believe the “cop was a jerk” stories. Body cams and the like will start to shed light on these kinds of things.
BTW my favorite part of the LA Times story was right at the end”
That was good. I needed a good laugh.
Yeah, that last paragraph is funnier than a lungful of laughing gas. Rall has had this coming to him for some time.
I’ll give him this (and nothing else); he wrote a funny, apparently truthful article a few years ago about how much the collapse of newspapers had humbled working journalists, and he ruefully admitted that cartoonists were faring among the very worst in terms of cutbacks. This is not just a liberal whine; I’ve also read similar stories by Jonah Goldberg and John Podhoretz about how relative fame no longer translates into relative wealth. So at least we have this consolation: Ted Rall is not going to get rich licensing his characters to theme parks.
I like this, from Rall’s own version:
Based on this 14-year-old recording I never knew existed — one that Officer Durr recorded without my knowledge or consent and in a clandestine manner not visible to anyone present — the editors at the Times informed me that my blog post was a lie.
See, civilians should be warned when they are being recorded or observed by an objective witness, in case they feel like telling melodramatic lies about the officer’s conduct. Otherwise, it’s not fair.
He posts a transcript of the tape, which sounds pretty much like any traffic stop except that there are a lot of random women making odd remarks.
BTW, does anyone else notice or object to the fact that most news outlets now routinely use “cops” instead of “police”, “policemen” or “policewomen”? Maybe I’m an oversensitive mick, but it seems slightly disrespectful–not when an actual, honest to goodness officer uses the term, or in friendly colloquial writing like Ricochet, but in the NYT or on the NBC News website. If there was a similarly slangy term for “teacher” or “bureaucrat”, would they constantly use it in major news stories?
In my experience most slang terms for bureaucrats are not printable.
Part of the problem is that good cops don’t get press coverage, so the problem seems worse than it is.
On the other hand, that’s actually a good sign; it’s when police corruption stops being news that society is really screwed.
Ted has had his Brian Williams moment. Maybe he can get a job on MSNBC.
Yes—I notice and object.
Other than in very informal, friendly circumstances, law enforcement officers prefer to be called Police Officers or Game Wardens or Troopers. (George W. Bush gained considerable credibility with my guys when they were detailed to provide additional security for a bike ride, because he knew what a game warden was, and knew the difference between a game warden and a marine patrol officer!)
Should you find yourself talking about a mixed bag of wardens, troopers, municipal officers and Feds—welcome to my world—- the accepted term is “law enforcement officers” or even LEOs (pronounced as in the astrological sign, which I don’t much like but it’s gaining currency).
Gary: I don’t object to the word “cop,” nor do any of my coworkers. We don’t see it as a pejorative. I use it myself in some of my more casual writing.
I’m with you Gary. I have a radio show on Iheartmedia / Clear Channel and their news people are instructed to use words like “cops” and “guy.” “Guy” is my pet peeve. What happen to good old “area man?”
Have a nice day.
Clearly a Gestapo rave-off.
Well, tell ya that I lived near N. Western and Melrose Ave for about 4 years, and admit the cops in the early 1960s were pretty ferocious. We wouldn’t have dared call them “pigs” in those days. My husband was a very bad driver, and he got stopped, and the cop made us change seats so I could drive us home. At least we didn’t get a ticket. The cop should have slapped the hubby upside the head, but didn’t do that either.
Ted Rall has been intellectually dishonest in his comic strips for decades. I’m not at all surprised that he would outright lie as well. Plus, he’s published some of the most racist cartoons I’ve seen in print since the days of Jim Crow.
The problem with Rall’s story is that it doesn’t sound true from the get-go. It defies common sense and experience that a policeman would treat an innocent man who is not resisting arrest or otherwise mouthing off to the officer with such disrespect.
And if he did, there would be more than one incident with this officer that fit that description.
This sounds like a barroom story innocently exaggerated for effect enough times that the teller forgot the actual true (but boring) story.
But I’ve buried the lede.
Does the LAPD actually store digital audio files of every routine traffic stop they have had for the last 15 years? I’d like to see the hard drive that’s stored on.
During the Dubya years, the press let Rall get away with murder. He’s was their bad boy, saying openly what they wanted to say but wouldn’t. Good for the LAT for finally drawing a line somewhere, but realize that the LAT and other outlets actually published and endorsed absolutely vile stuff on Rall’s behalf for years, and they were fine with it because Rall brought in the raging lefties. They have a long way to go to earn any kind of forgiveness from readers.
At the time of this incident, officers had the option of carrying their own recorders and maintaining their own tapes. When a complaint was made against an officer, the investigator asked him if he had a tape. The officer’s tape was then recorded onto the tape used for the investigation, which was also used to record whatever interviews were done. I don’t know how long Internal Affairs keeps their files, but it’s fortunate they still had the tape of the Rall encounter.
Sorry, I must have missed the part where Rall filed a baseless complaint in 2001. I’m surprised that didn’t make the news back then since he was a minor celebrity.
In Maine (everywhere?) if one of the two parties being recorded agrees, that is sufficient. Yes?
Kate, in some states, both parties need to know and agree, but I don’t know if they would apply in this case.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy…
Ted Rall’s articles still show up regularly in the Japan Times. I wonder if that will change.
California is a “two-party” state, but there is a provision in the law that allows officers to record contacts while in the performance of their duties. They do not have to inform people they are being recorded.
One of the questions that arises when it comes to LEO body-cams is that of privacy for civilians who happen to be walking around in the vicinity, or ask for directions, or are temporarily stopped and interviewed for some reason. Presumably, in order to ensure that police officers are not shooting people for sheer, racist sport, or eating other people’s hash-brownies while on duty, or making mean remarks about the handicapped, we all have to accept the idea that agents of the government are randomly recording our behavior…