Men considering legal action in Oildale arrest

re: Men considering legal action in Oildale arrest

catpaw — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 14:56:02 GMT

I'm glad to know that a violent criminal is off the streets for a few years--well, maybe two years, when the early release policy is considered. Is his sentence subject to 3 Strikes?

Just curious. What happened to the recording of the melee? Who owns the "movie" now?

re: Men considering legal action in Oildale arrest

Kiyoshi Tomono — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:23:36 GMT

catpaw---the originial, I believe,is still being held in evidence at the courthouse. The video provided to us was a copy of that. The BPD has its own copy as well. We did post the video in its entirety on our Website: you can find it on the same page as the story. Sgt. Greg Terry said this is the entire tape: it's the same thing that the BPD has, no more, no less.

As for Marella, I don't think this is his 3rd strike.

re: Men considering legal action in Oildale arrest

CALLMEMSTRACY — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 12:14:57 GMT

CATPAW: Leonard Marella was the wrong suspect in the home invasion robbery; he did not have anything to do with that. Mr. Marella is not a violent criminal, but he does have a drug problem and, although Mr. Marella was not right for running from police, the Bakersfield Police Department was wrong for the physical abuse they did on him. Keep in mind that a person is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law and just because the police say it does not mean it is true or accurate. Police are not always the good guys; there are good cops and bad cops and Bakersfied has it's share of bad cops.

re: Men considering legal action in Oildale arrest

catpaw — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:34:19 GMT

As I recall the news report, a gun Mr. Marella was carrying was recovered. I did not see brutality on the tape. The suspect was resisting arrest, the dog was restrained, he was not being beaten. I understand Mr. Marella admitted he ran from the police because he has an outstanding warrant for his arrest.

The tape plainly shows an officer telling Mr. Zamora to step back. He didn't.

If an ex-felon carrying a gun is nonviolent, I hope I don't run into a violent one.

re: Men considering legal action in Oildale arrest

CALLMEMSTRACY — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 08:35:35 GMT

Mr. Marella had no business carrying a gun, but he was using it for his own personal protection. I in no way approve of the gun part, but he had no plan on using it on anyone unless he had to. Police knew nothing of the gun when they physically abused Mr. Marella because police searched the area and found nothing that day; the gun was found he next day in someones back yard. The reason Mr. Marella had the gun was because he was using it to protect himself because he had a lot of dope on him. Again, I am not making excuses for the wrong he did, but the police were also wrong in how thy handled the arrest. Initially, police thought Mr. Marella was someone else, but they later found out they had the wrong man. I think the video clearly shows Mr. Xavier Zamora stepping back when the officer told him to.

re: Men considering legal action in Oildale arrest

tfaulk13 — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 06:54:12 GMT

What i recall seeing was Mr. Zamora stepping back when first directed, but then he moved closer to the altercation with the police and Mr. Marella. As for the comment that Mr. Marella had the gun for the purpose of his own protection because he had a lot dope on him and had no plan of using it on anyone unless he had to...WOW! The police may have mistaken him for a robbery suspect, but he ran. Seriously think from an officers point of view for a moment. You have report of an elderly man beaten and robbed of a gun and whatever else by a cowardly worthless individual. While canvassing to find the individual, they come across an individual that takes off running at the sight of the police officers. They don't have the ability to know if this is the person that commited the robbery or is someone running for another reason. What kind of chances should they take with the known and unknown info they have? Apparently Mr. Marella tossed his gun while the pursuit was going on. Even if he didn't, are the police expected to know which criminals with a gun will use it to shoot them and which one's won't? Then, whether he had his hands up and ready to surrender or not, until he is down, cuffed and under control he is a threat to the officers and general public or at a minimum is at risk of bolting away again. If Mr. Marella had simply produced his hands for the officers to cuff him, he never would've been tasered. you cannot claim that he complied, because the officers would've definately put cuffs on if able to. They had no knowledge of why he was not complying, but can't be expected to allow an individual to pull a weapon out if they have one. Yes, we are all innocent until proven guilty. Here's some info you may not know...It is against the law to run or drive away from a law enforcement officer, even if you've done absolutely nothing wrong prior to "bolting away". It's the act of fleeing just at the sight of a police officer that is a violation of California law. Another eye opener...There have been many cases of people that everyone who knows them swears they would never use a gun or act violently without provocation. Yet while prolonged drug use takes it's toll on the individual, they are often arrested for acts of violence or murder. After being arrested and their system becomes drug free for awhile, they almost always say they're sorry and they just weren't in control of their actions anymore...it was because of the drugs.