All over the official news outlets, surprised nobody has mentioned it yet -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/20/AR2007032001132.html
http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=25&sid=1093129
http://www.nbc4.com/news/11309293/detail.html

The blog was updated too - http://justiceforsal.com/

Just heard this last night on the radio, but I was two tired to come and post it.

Im interested to see hwo this turns out.

Edit: I am TOO tired to spell correctly either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/21/2007 05:06PM by KeepOnTruckin.

Good... it is too bad citizens have to go through this long and expensive process to accomplish the results that are the FCPD's job to do.

pgens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good... it is too bad citizens have to go through
> this long and expensive process to accomplish the
> results that are the FCPD's job to do.


They investigated and determined that the incident was accidental..... i guess they think that $12 mil will make them feel better about their sons death. They even want the money their son made in ilegal gambling....go figure.

In the beginning the family said it wasn't about the money, just about making policy changes. Looks like it's really about the money. Maybe fairfax county should just give the family back some of the illegal money they confiscated.

4wheeler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They investigated and determined that the incident
> was accidental..... i guess they think that $12
> mil will make them feel better about their sons
> death. They even want the money their son made in
> ilegal gambling....go figure.

You miss the larger point... the actual shooting may have been accidental, but the shooting would not have happened if the excessive show of force wasn't deployed. I have said it in prior threads but I don't blame the shooting officer as much as I blame the commanding officer who decided it would be a good idea to send a SWAT team to search the apartment of a gambler with no criminal record. Is THAT guy and everyone else up and down the chain who grants that authority still in charge of SWAT team deployment decisions?

He was a doctor... he had a schedule... if they had a warrant to search and they REALLY thought he was dangerous, then arrest him at his office, drive him in handcuffs to the apartment and execute the search warrant there.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/21/2007 08:24PM by pgens.

pgens, makes sense to me. Less chance he would be armed if he was in the process of checking someones eyes.

I never did see the harm in gambling. Like anything else it can be abused. I go to AC and Vegas a few times a year and I hate that some moral SOB makes it so I have to travel for four hours by plane or car to spend my money that I made legally. Meanwhile this same government runs a lottery with odds so great only the most stupid think they have a chance of winning.

Also he didnt have to be home to serve the search warrant. He can be arrested at one location while they searched the other.

>4wheeler Wrote:
>-------------------------------------------------------
> They investigated and determined that the incident
> was accidental.....

That's such a bizarre attitude to take. The govt. killed a guy for no reason whatsoever, plain and simple. They were not provoked and had no cause to do what they did. The fact that it was an accident is even more of a reason for the family to sue. Sure, 12 mil ain't gonna bring the guy back. But this type of negligence on our govt.'s part should not go without consequence.

Nothing shakes up (and forces change) in a bureaucracy more than a big $$$ judgement.

Even though I (and all of you) will pay if they win....I say more power to 'em.

I sure don't want that damned SWAT team showing up at my house for some minor shit...and if the Culosis win, there's less chance it will.

duh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing shakes up (and forces change) in a bureaucracy more than a big $$$
> judgement. Even though I (and all of you) will pay if they win....I say more
> power to 'em.

EXACTLY.

Good point.

TheMeeper Wrote:

>
> That's such a bizarre attitude to take. The govt.
> killed a guy for no reason whatsoever, plain and
> simple. They were not provoked and had no cause
> to do what they did. The fact that it was an
> accident is even more of a reason for the family
> to sue. Sure, 12 mil ain't gonna bring the guy
> back. But this type of negligence on our govt.'s
> part should not go without consequence.

So what you are saying is that the SWAT officer pulled up and just shot him because maybe it was a slow night?...Come on....And by the way, he was an "innocent citizen without criminal record" simply because he was not cought yet. What happened it was a terrible accident. It was not deliberate.

So what you are saying is that the SWAT officer pulled up and just shot him because maybe it was a slow night?

I never said anything like that at all.

he was an "innocent citizen without criminal record" simply because he was not cought yet

Yeah, that's pretty much how our Constitution works. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. There's nothing in there that gives the govt. the authority and justification to shoot someone based on whether they've been "cought" yet.

Even if he was "cought", he'd still be alive rather than gunned down by police in front of his own house.

What happened it was a terrible accident. It was not deliberate.

Agreed. It was a huge accident. The government should pay for it.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
There's nothing in there that gives the
> govt. the authority and justification to shoot
> someone based on whether they've been "cought"
> yet.
>
> Even if he was "cought", he'd still be alive
> rather than gunned down by police in front of his
> own house.
>

In a way you agree that it was an accident, on the other hand you make it sound like it was a deliberate action. I agree in looking for a justification and retribution to the family if it was premeditated. It was not...it was a terrible accident, there was an internal investigation, there was an outside investigation by the FBI and ATF and they all said the same thing, it was an accident. So why go after $12 million dollars if they are not after the money, why want the thousands of dollars that were taken from his ilegal gambling, if they are not after the money. Did you noticed that they don't ever agreed that his son was involved in ilegal activities? did you noticed the statement of the family of that bank robber that was shot by the police in Rt 1 ?? "My son was a nice man, innocent, loved his family and was shot by the police" well, maybe, but he also robbed 3 banks telling the bank tellers that he had a gun....makes you wonder, eh?

LOL. No kidding,

>makes you wonder, eh?
>Did you noticed that they don't ever agreed that his son was involved in ilegal activities?

It doesn't make me wonder at all. The guy wasn't convicted of illegal gambling. He had the sudden misfortune of being killed by police before he was ever arrested and given a day in court. Whether he was guilty or not isn't up to the police, or the newspapers, to decide. Even if he was guilty, it's ridiculous to think that the police are somehow less accountable for their actions, or that the family shouldn't be seeking meaningful justice.

did you noticed the statement of the family of that bank robber that was shot by the police in Rt 1 ??

This a logically fallacious point, you're just creating a straw-man argument by interjecting this into the conversation. I'm not familiar with it, and it's irrelevant to the Sal Culosi case.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/22/2007 06:50AM by TheMeeper.

http://www.elmonorojo.com/



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/09/2014 04:04PM by El Mono Rojo.

4wheeler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did you noticed that they don't ever agreed that
> his son was involved in ilegal activities?

This is America and one is innocent until proven guilty. In Culosi's case the government made decisions and took actions that had an unplanned result but a result they are responsible for. He was killed during a police action. Accident or not, the government terminated his life, without trial, in actions surrounding an alleged criminal activity. Whether he was really guilty or not is actually beside the point.

The family has not received the justice it feels is appropriate and the next step, after the law enforcement community goes through the necessary motions to clear itself, is suing them. Whoever sent the SWAT team out there needs to explain why it was necessary, because that is the setup for the accident.

How many of us would accept a statement from the police that boils down to "we sent out heavy arms to execute a lousy search warrant, guns were pointed at your son, and oops, we fucked up, sorry, and no one is getting fired"? Do you really want to live in a country where police departments are not responsible for shooting unarmed civilians standing in front of their house? It is odd how a police department claiming it was too poor to fix the security gate at a police station, allowing crazy people to drive in and shoot up the place, has the money to send SWAT teams to execute a search warrant on a gambler who has a professional day job.

It was actually only the one crazy guy that shot up the police station.

I stand corrected.

I know that this isn't how our system works but, I thought that cops were citizens also. Therefore I would charge the shooting officer with involentary manslaughter. I don't agree with the "some are more equal than others" mentality that is exhibited in regards to police forces. Don't construe my comments to mean that I disdain our forces. I whole heartedly support the Fairfax police. They are some of the best police in the country and this is painfully apparent when compared to state officers, like the Mason police for instance.

By the way I forgot to mention that this action is clearly a depravation of life, liberty and/or property with out due process. In strict violation of federal standards, which I belive have been wholly incorporated to the states through the 14th amendment.

In the beginning the family said it wasn't about the money, just about making policy changes. Looks like it's really about the money.

Seconded.

The old axiom of hitting them where it hurts; in the wallet rings true. no amoutn of money brings someone back BUT this does make a statement

County should pay up. Pay the family and end it there.

But all this talk about him being "innocent" is a crock a shit. Running an illegal gambling ring, and selling crack (hence the SWAT Team).
Yeah....sounds to me that he was on par with the Pope.

Glad he is dead!

Damn! now where am i gonna gamble all day and smoke crack??!?!?!

If they settle out of court it wont be as big a deal as if they sue and win the court case.

KeepOnTruckin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If they settle out of court it wont be as big a
> deal as if they sue and win the court case.


Your mom is a goddamned bitch that likes the taste of hard cock and your dad is a fuckin wigger, and a tool, and takes the high hard one up his ass. Get a life.

Since the arrest warrant was never served and he never got a trial he is guilty of nothing. For all anyone knows he may not have been found guilty at trial. That would make him innocent.

When someone sues the government and wins, we all loose. It really is OUR MONEY. But there is no reason why anyone should have pointed a gun at this guy.

Unfortunately, the dollars get sent to fairfax county because they have the biggest "need." The bureaucracy of our nany-state federal govenment doles out the money based on the places with a history of needing the most action. Fairfax county, therefore, gets more money by taking more "action" like using the SWAT team as often as possible. We couldn't claim to need as much money if the SWAT team wasn't deployed frequently enough.

In the short term, perhaps this will stop this kind of thing from happening, at least here. But I doubt it will. It happens all over the country where police raid people's houses for misdemeanor drug accusations and stuff. Read www.theagitator.com and see how often stuff like this goes down and we never hear about it because the victims are usually poor.

The men and women that make up our local police are great people, who do a great job, it is just that the system is banged up, and often their assignments are inappropriate and misguided.

Fairfax MF---er Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your mom is a goddamned bitch that likes the taste
> of hard cock and your dad is a fuckin wigger, and
> a tool, and takes the high hard one up his ass.
> Get a life.



Someone fell out the back of the short bus this morning.

and selling crack

The Culosi guy was never suspected of selling crack. They had a warrant to search for evidence of illegal gambling.

And who really gives a shit about the illegal gambling anyway. I've lived around bookies since I was like 14, it's not like they are a complete menace to the christian social order that has become our society. Sure, it's illegal, but it's not something we should dumb down into a throw-your-hands-to-your face "OMG- he's a bookie!" criminal act. Let's save that attitude for the real dangerous stuff, the real problems, the things that are hard for police to combat, rather than catching some dude taking football bets.

Funny how the state forbids gambling but they run the lottery which anyone knows has horrible odds. The churches bitch and moan about gambling but run bingo and raffles.

At least with sports betting you have a decent chance of winning as opposed to the lottery and keno which the states run. Plus any normal bookie will cut you off when you reach a loss limit. He knows how much you are good for.

If it's a crime I have no problem with them pursuing it. But they don't need to waste resources sending SWAT teams out for it. To me that isn't too far off from sending helicopters after red light runners.

It does get silly though... on one side of town we have a whole lot of illegal aliens hanging around known spots every morning unmolested by any law enforcement, and on the other we have SWAT teams deployed to assist with a frickin bookie. And one county over they send half the force out to eject a couple of people from a restaurant because they were obeying gun laws. I'm not saying law enforcement is easy yada yada, but whoever is in charge of these resourcing decisions could probably be doing a better job. I'm sure there are plenty of officers who would say the same thing.

and on the other we have SWAT teams deployed to assist with a frickin bookie.

Exactly. SWAT's purpose should be to escalate a dangerous situation and combat it with superior firepower.

Not to do something that a part-time sheriff's deputy might be able to accomplish with a little common sense.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/22/2007 10:48PM by TheMeeper.

KeepOnTruckin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Someone fell out the back of the short bus this
> morning.


"Lips like sugar. Sugar kisses."

TheMeeper,
Police found drugs in his home. He was a drug dealer...

TheMeeper, Police found drugs in his home. He was a drug dealer...

You are incorrect. If you read the police report, all it says is they found "suspected cocaine" and "drug paraphenalia". That's it. That's the official police record. That's all they said.

It doesn't give quantities, doesn't say anything about "drug dealing", and it oddly does not provide a reason why the police never tested this "suspected cocaine". The police also never bothered to say what this "drug paraphenalia" was, and burying a vague reference like that in a report can mean just about anything. I'm sure I can walk into anyone's house and find "suspected cocaine" and "drug paraphenalia".

I'm not a police-hater, and I am not saying they are lying. I am just pointing out that there aren't any facts to support "girl's" absurd claim about drug dealing.

Not to mention "girl" is a fucking moron for asserting that mere possession of drugs makes one a drug dealer...

Yeah, that's like saying all girls with tits are hookers.

ALl girls are hookers.

No matter how it played out. ( and none of us really knows ) The fact of the matter stands that if he wasn't doing anything illegal the police would have never been in this mess. I wasn't watching this take place nor did I sit in on the briefing for the swat team. I can tell you for sure that if the police sent two officers to serve a warrant and they both or one of them was killed then we would all be bithcing that the police should of sent the swat team. It sure is easy to be a Monday morning quarterback isn't it?

Didn't he deserve a trial? Kind of strange logic, well he was up to something so too bad he got shot.

Drew Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> if he wasn't doing anything illegal the police
> would have never been in this mess.

Well, he was never proven to be doing anything illegal. The cop, on the other hand, did do something illegal: he shot a man who was not resisting, nor was he armed, nor was he found guilty of anything.

So if you're going to spout some stupid shit like that, perhaps you need to switch it around. Maybe something like, "If the cop had not shot an unarmed man, the police would never have been in this mess."

Drew Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can tell you for
> sure that if the police sent two officers to serve
> a warrant and they both or one of them was killed
> then we would all be bithcing that the police
> should of sent the swat team.

Or they may bitch because the police didn't do it during his normal work schedule, when he was miles away, not there.

You have just argued that every service should be done with a SWAT team to avoid any chance of an officer being killed.

I can tell you for sure that if the police sent two officers to serve a warrant and they both or one of them was killed then we would all be bithcing that the police should of sent the swat team.

So you claim something is justified by presenting so-called "facts" about "what would probably happen" in a competely different scenario. That is a foolish line of reasoning.

Accidental or not, the guy is dead and the Fairfax cops are to blame. Big payout coming.

{The cop, on the other hand, did do something illegal):


So your saying that shooting someone on accident was illegal. Well let's all head to the Jail together unless you have never had an accident.


(So if you're going to spout some stupid shit like that):

I really enjoyed your quote. I sure hope you have some more. I am at the edge of my seat waiting for you elementary response..........

"Or they may bitch because the police didn't do it during his normal work schedule, when he was miles away, not there."

"You have just argued that every service should be done with a SWAT team to avoid any chance of an officer being killed."

Hmm lets think for a second about each option.

1. During his normal work schedule.....Dr appiontments or illegal gambling in his house.

2. Send the SWAT team. Yep that's my call. Lawsuit....let's just see how this plays out. My bet will be on the Police side.

Drew Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> {The cop, on the other hand, did do something
> illegal):
>
>
> So your saying that shooting someone on accident
> was illegal. Well let's all head to the Jail
> together unless you have never had an accident.
>


A negligent discharge of a firearm on the target range may be an "accident", but when it kills somebody, it becomes a crime. I think the term is "manslaughter" or some such.

All the more shame for being one of the so-called elite cops, who are held up as firearm experts.

And more shame yet for the reptiles who refused to prosecute this man because he is a cop. Proof that some of us are more equal than others.

Say what you will about Fairfax County Cops but Prince William county has the dumbest fucking cops PERIOD. The assholes that patrol 234 around sharpshooters & Best buy are the biggest assholes ever. If this real tall ,dark haired asshole stops you be carful he beats up citizens all the time.Cops deserve EVERYTHING THEY GET.FUCK the police.

You sound like a real winner.

Fairfax County Police rock!!!!!!!!!!!!! Best group of men and women in the county!
Be proud they serve you....

I believe I covered this further up. In Virginia it's refered to as involentary manslaughter and is a class 5 felony.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-36

What no one seems to see here is that when you are dealing with millions of dollars like Colosi was.(I heard they found almost a million $$ in his house) there is a very high likelyhood there will be guns present. Why do you think drug dealers carry guns..It is not because of the drugs that they have it is because they fear someone trying to take their money. So lets recap millions of dollars(yes from gambling but millions non the less)= high possiblity for gun so SWAT most definately called for in that situation.

Still illegal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What no one seems to see here is that when you are
> dealing with millions of dollars like Colosi
> was.(I heard they found almost a million $$ in his
> house) there is a very high likelyhood there will
> be guns present.

> So lets recap millions of
> dollars(yes from gambling but millions non the
> less)= high possiblity for gun so SWAT most
> definately called for in that situation.

Ok, let's re-recap. He's a doctor. He has an office. The "millions" and the guns aren't going to be there. He has a schedule.

Now given the above, does it make more sense to a) send a SWAT team where they believe guns and a possible shootout could occur, or b) send a squad car to his office, collect him there, and serve a search warrant while he is in handcuffs in the squad car?

fair4xor wrote:
Ok, let's re-recap. He's a doctor. He has an office. The "millions" and the guns aren't going to be there. He has a schedule.

Now given the above, does it make more sense to a) send a SWAT team where they believe guns and a possible shootout could occur, or b) send a squad car to his office, collect him there, and serve a search warrant while he is in handcuffs in the squad car
_________________________________________________________________________
WOW!!!!!!!!!!! Didn't know how good of a SWAT Team leader you could be. You should put your application in and take over the position.

If they arrested him at his office you would be saying, "they shouldn't of sent the police to his office. Arrested the man in front of all of his clients. That is just wrong!!"

Yeah great job new SWAT Team Leader! Where the hell were you? Man would still be alive if you were there

I agree with pgens (fairfaxor or whateever his new lame name is)... I would rather see him humiliated in front of his clients than the other scenario which clearly failed.

You are putting words in his mouth, y2k. That's a pretty weak argument tactic.

At least I can keep my lame names to one word :) But I think Y2K is suffering from a bout of "I have no argument so I'll just call people names or make up things they didn't say" that ails so many trolls here.

So yeah Y2K, if the idea of deciding to arrest someone where they clearly aren't a danger over arresting someone at a spot where it is believed a SWAT team is needed is such a leap of tactical brilliance unknown to the department then you are absolutely right, I should be in charge. Not of the SWAT team, which should not have been called, but of the guy who decides when to call the SWAT team.

They didn't even have to nab him in front of his clients, if that is a concern. He has an office and probably has a schedule. Have an officer call and get his office hours, then sit an undercover car outside the office an hour before the office opens. Post lookout near house to see when he leaves, radio ahead the warning to the office lookout. When he approaches the building, get him there. No clients would see it. Is that such an unreasonable tactic? Takes two officers to pull off instead of an expensive SWAT team deployment and is much safer.

The lawsuit was just settled out of court for 2 million dollars.

Other threads on Dr. Sal Culosi:
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/2/11602.html
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/2/28753/28927.html
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/2/15224/15741.html
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/wiki/Salvatore_J._Culosi

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/12/AR2011011205758.html

Fairfax to pay $2 million to Culosi family
By Tom Jackman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 12, 2011; 8:32 PM

Nearly five years after a Fairfax County police officer shot and killed an unarmed man outside his townhouse, the county has agreed to pay the man's parents $2 million to settle their lawsuit against the officer.

The death of Salvatore J. Culosi, a 37-year-old optometrist who lived in the Fair Oaks area, sparked outrage over the use of a SWAT team to arrest a man suspected of the nonviolent crime of taking bets on football games. Fairfax police were aware that Culosi had no criminal history or connection to weapons.

The SWAT officer who fired the shot, Deval V. Bullock, said his .45-caliber pistol accidentally discharged Jan. 24, 2006, after his vehicle door bumped his left side as he aimed at Culosi with his right hand, causing a sympathetic reflex response.

The Fairfax prosecutor in 2006, Robert F. Horan Jr., ruled that the shooting was not a criminal act. To prove manslaughter in Virginia, the shooter must show "negligence so gross as to indicate a callous disregard of human life." A federal civil rights investigation also cleared Bullock.

But Chief David M. Rohrer suspended Bullock without pay for three weeks and removed him from the SWAT team. Rohrer also changed the way SWAT teams are assigned and how police shootings are investigated. He acknowledged the police role in the shooting the day after it occurred, offered his condolences to Culosi's family and later issued a report on the incident.

Culosi's parents, Salvatore and Anita Culosi, filed suit in federal court in Alexandria in 2007 and then saw their day in court delayed by pretrial hearings and appeals of pretrial rulings. U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema dismissed Fairfax County, Rohrer and the head of the SWAT team as defendants, leaving only Bullock, whose legal fees and any potential damages would be covered by the county. The trial was scheduled to begin next week.

The Culosis' attorneys, Bernard J. DiMuro and Michael Lieberman, launched their own investigation and devised a theory of the shooting that differed drastically from the police version, court filings show.

Calculating the trajectory of the shot that entered Culosi's side and pierced his aorta, and the location of Bullock's shell casing near where Culosi fell, the lawyers argued that Bullock had moved away from his sport-utility vehicle and was only eight to 10 feet from Culosi - not 20 feet and emerging from his vehicle, as Bullock said - when he fired.

Police lawyers said in court briefs that Culosi may not have been standing perfectly upright, which would affect the trajectory calculations, and that the shell casing might have blown or been kicked down the slight incline from where Bullock fired.

Though Bullock was following proper procedure by aiming at his target, he was not supposed to have his finger on the trigger. Bullock told police investigators in 2006, "my finger rolled and somehow got on the trigger and pulled the trigger," an internal affairs interview transcript shows.

DiMuro and Lieberman hired experts to testify that the shooting couldn't have happened the way Bullock said, court records show, and produced an animated video showing how the trajectory of the bullet didn't match Bullock's story - but it did match a close-range shooting.

Brinkema ruled that three Culosi experts could testify. And last week, she ruled that the animation could be shown to the jury. Settlement talks heated up, and in a closed session Tuesday night, the Fairfax Board of Supervisors approved the payment, county spokeswoman Merni Fitzgerald said.

2 Million dollars isn't SHIT !
His parents must have fallen on tough times financially.
I think they should have taken the case to court.

Yeah now Fairfax can pretend like it never happened. I'm sure part of that 2 million dollar settlement is to buy their silence.