SFPD Kill Scholarship Student & Security Guard After ‘Gentrifiers’ Get Suspicious

This story comes courtesy of local activist Jason Wallach.

Alejandro Nieto

Alejandro Nieto

I am upset this evening because today I learned about Alejandro Nieto, who was killed by a barrage of San Francisco Police Department bullets last Friday evening near the service road leading up Bernal Hill.

I attended the vigil in Alex’s (as he was known to friends) honor that took place at the site where he died, on the service road leading up Bernal Hill. At the vigil, I learned that he was a scholarship student at City College of San Francisco, studying Criminal Justice. He wanted to be a parole officer to help guide young men’s lives into good directions. He was a devout Buddhist who believed in creating the peace in his community that he wanted to see spread across the Earth. He was a loving, caring individual. I found out through a poem that his birthday was March 4th.

I also learned that the SFPD shot him last Friday as he ate a burrito just before heading to work as a security guard. He was wearing his work-authorized tazer on his belt, but the police did not ask him about that. They did not consider the source of racist fear that motivated the (mostly) white dog-walking residents to frantically call police because of Alejandro’s presence. The cruel irony is that his job was to provide a sense of security for patrons at a restaurant/bar — so they could eat in peace. But Ale’s presence — his simple presence IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HE GREW UP IN — was enough to create a sense of IN-security for his recently arrived neighbors… and that not only could he not eat in peace, but because of it Alejandro is now Resting in Peace.

There is so much work to be done on so many levels to prevent this type of thing from ever happening again. It won’t be changed in a day. But if we show up for Alex in the coming days, maybe we can show that he did not die in vain. (Cuz for right now, it sure feels like his life was senselessly stolen from him.)

There will be a Town Hall meeting about this police murder of one of our community members tomorrow, Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 6:00 PM at Leonard R. Flynn Elementary School, 3125 Cesar Chavez. Alejandro’s family and friends are asking for community support and presence at this meeting. Please come if you can.

written by Jason Wallach for the Center of Political Education

Here’s another story about this



  1. Just to make sure we give credit where it is due…the commentary above was written by local activist Jason Wallach, coordinator for the Center for Political Education.

    • Thanks Carlos and Needa.. I saw it on Needa’s page and didnt see the it was shared from jason..It was corrected.. can someone put me in touch with him?

  2. needa bee says:

    Hey davey thank u for spreading tbe word. An the piece is,written by jason wallock. I was just spreading the news this happened

  3. Does anyone know what happened and what was said at the town hall? Who called the COPS on Alex? They need to be outed, imo. Shame on them and the murderous SFPD!

    • There’s twitter documentation on SFGATE

    • You don’t even know what the situation, yet you’re calling the SFPD “murderous”? Why don’t you find out what happens before making such accusations.

      • @ML as a native of SF, I know murderous cops when I see them. If you don’t see a pattern here then you haven’t been paying attention. Alejandro was unarmed. Have you heard of Kenneth Harding? Idris Shelly(sp). Perhaps you’ve hear of Oscar Grant? There is an obvious pattern of police departments all over the US using unnecessary deadly force against unarmrd youth of color and poor folks in general. Again and again. I know folks who knew Alejandro. My Mom works at City College. He was a peaceful, thoughtful person and did not deserve to die because of trigger happy cops or nutless, socially ignorant gentrifiers calling the COPS on Alex. Who called them? I want to give that scared nimrod an earful.

        • Thank you, Jeremiah, for that clarification. I was about to that post respond in a less civil manner. It reminded me of the comment of a friend of mine when I told him I marched in protest at the murder of Sean Bell. His response was, “But maybe [the victim] was a bad guy!” Turns out, he wasn’t. My guess is, neither was Alejandro. May he rest in peace.

        • He was unarmed? He had a holstered taser on him. That’s not being unarmed. How are the cops suppose to know whether it’s a gun or not when it’s holstered? Not to mention this confrontation occurred at night and approximately 75ft away from each other, thus making it more difficult to see.

          Citizens called, not because of his race as this one-sided article says. They called because he was acting erratically and had a gun on his hip (which of course we know now, but being unsure of at the time).

          Mr. Nieto drew for his taser after being told to show his hands and they shot him. You don’t reach for something on your person, especially something that’s holstered and resembles a gun. The police have the right to protect themselves when they determine to be a looming threat.

          It’s an unfortunate killing, but this very well could’ve been avoided if Mr. Nieto followed orders.

          • Wow. And you are all hunky dory with that scripted from the PD playbook narrative? What a luxury and privilege to think that the police are there to protect and serve.
            A taser is a taser is a taser which Alejandro as a Security Guard was liscenced to carry. If you can’t tell the difference between a taser and a gun, shoot first and cover your ass later is not the best first response policy. If he had a latte and Google glasses and a Mcclaren stroller and was not profiled as a “large Latin male with a gun.”, Alejandro would still be alive as the police would have proceeded with more tact and restraint.

    • 1. People in the neighborhood called police due to someone acting erratically with a gun. You would have done the same, me too.
      2. I see you weren’t at the town hall meeting, but if you were you’d notice that the taser was designed to look like a gun. Therefore it does.

      Be objective for but one second and you’ll realize that this situation can be simplified down really quite nicely:

      1. People call cops due to a domestic disturbance involving someone acting erratically with a gun
      2. Police arrive
      3. Man points weapon at police
      4. Police kill someone with weapon pointed at them

      I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just saying that if this happened anywhere in the US the exact same result would occur. This is not because of bad cops as you may say, but rather the fucked up gun control (or lack thereof) in this country.

      Get your head out of irrationality for a moment and you’ll get some clarity around this rather quick.


  4. Charlie Koledo says:

    Im confused. Seems like about 50 percent of the story was left out. Contrary to popular belief, the police don’t just shoot people for eating a burrito in a security uniform with a teaser. Im guessing once surveillance video is obtained and witness statements are taken the story is going to change A LOT. It is very sad that a life was lost but I think before we jump to conclusions, we should wait until the case is investigated. If it happened the way you write, looks like a lot of cops are going to prison.

    • mrDaveyd says:

      Like the way cops went to prison for the killing of Amadou, Sean Bell Rodney King or the lengthy time given to Johannes Mehserle wasn’t the public told to ‘wait for the full story in all those cases as well??.. I remember hearing the same line.. Cops just don’t shoot folks 41 times.. They just don’t shoot folks 50 times.. They just don’t shoot unrestrained men on subway platforms..We all saw the video to that..

      Remember the 6 officers who shot those delivery women in LA 100 times mistaken their light blue pick up truck for a dark gray one.. Without warning they shot 100x..what facts were we waiting for then? Its been over one year and LAPD still refuses to release the names of those officers..

      • I’m with Charlie with this one. The way this was written was in a way to make it seem like someone was just eating a burrito of a certain race with a taser on him and then was shot because of that. You can’t report news without knowing the truth of the situation – and the result is extremely unfortunate. You also can’t make up stories to rally up a race war. If this is to bring news and information to the public, then this is just plain old awful journalism.

        It’s also EXTREMELY offensive to write, “They did not consider the source of racist fear that motivated the (mostly) white dog-walking residents to frantically call police because of Alejandro’s presence.” in an article named ‘SFPD Kill Scholarship Student & Security Guard After —> ‘Gentrifiers’ <—-Get Suspicious'. I live in Bernal and am white. Sorry about that if that offends you.

        I am interested to see what becomes of this and I only wish peace for his family and friends. And I agree that not all cops are innocent, but jumping to conclusions and calling people "gentrifiers" just because they're white doesn't seem to be doing any good. That's racism.

        • Ess, how LONG have lived in Bernal Heights? Did you know that before you moved there it was primarily a neighborhood of working class mostly Latino folk. I think some more recent immigrants to SF (mostly white often tech sector, privileged, arrogant without even realizing) could seriously consider the impact, socially, culturally, and economically they are having on the region and us who are born and raised here. I don’t think y’all realize how exponentually fucked up it has become for poor and working class people in the Bay since you started colonizing it. I have to deal with such people every day and your collective arrogance, ignorance, (do you know who Kenneth Harding is? Or Oscar Grant?) and all around insensitivity is stunning! Davey is right but you don’t even have the historical understanding to know just HOW right he is. Cause y’all showed up like Columbus 5 minutes ago acting like you OWN SF. You will never understand SF and most of y’all will bugger off to the burbs after you made your money or you find it “too hard” to raise a family here. And we who live here will be left to carry on and clean up your mess. The damage will be done. Race and class play a role in this and incidents here every day. If you are too privileged to see that…then you deserve to be offended. Know thyself.
          Btw, I am considered “white”, know folks who knew and taught Alejandro, and my people have been in SF since the 1850’s.

          • I grew up in San Francisco, as did my dad. I wonder though what is the difference between “colonizing” in the 1850’s and 2014? Why do you put “white” in quotation marks?

          • @Zoe so as someone who has been here a while perhaps you have had a opportunity to know this place, it’s cultures, diversity, and history enough to be culturally and socially sensible and sensitive and not just herd together with people who look like you from a similar class background. Regarding 1850 my folks were poor imigrants then. But I see your point. Do you see mine. As 4th generation I connect with many apsects of SF that newcomers often dismiss, ignore, misunderstand, or violate. Many newcomers are ignorant of recent or past SF history. They treat SF as their whore to fuck with and then spit upon and leave in the gutter. I have more respect for her than that. Gentfrication and police murder both facilitated by racism are not OK in my book.
            Lastly whiteness is not an ethnicity but like all race, a social construct. I have European, Native American, and African American blood but all people see is my whiteness. Which means when confronted by police, if I speak in an educated, empowered, privileged tone, they are less likely to fuck with me than otherwise. Alejandro being profiled as a “large, Latin man with a gun (false)” set the scenario for the police to use deadly force.

          • Jeremiah.. quit frontin knucklehead..the real troll is probably you . Smell a rat a mile away. Why don’t you expose your real self Davey d.

      • Good points!

      • Man im not saying the police dont ever commit gross injustices but half the story is without a doubt missing here. Im not buying that he was sitting there eating a burrito and the police rolled up and drilled him in the head. Something went down between the two and when you leave that part out you seem incredulous.

      • Doktor Jeep says:

        The Amadou case went political and the state sought Murder 2. The cops clearly screwed up and murdered a man, but murder 2 was a stretch, and the state could not convict on that charge. I was in New York City at that time and even the “conservative” talking heads were saying the cops screwed up. (I think the prosecutor was on the side of the cops and KNEW that murder 2 could not stick but that’s just me). If the state sought manslaughter they would have gotten it. The Amadou case was brought up again with the Zimmerman trial. I knew that Zimmerman would get off the moment I heard the state was going for Murder 2. People want to blame stand your ground when it was not even invoked in this case (it would have failed and it’s failure would have implicated GZ even more) yet if they sought manslaughter because there was no doubt that Zimmerman PUT himself in a situation that led to someone getting shot, he’d be in prison today. While I can agree with you on the topic of murderous cops, making these cases too politicized and hot button tends to make the prosecutors (ever thinking of their careers as governors and seeking fame, or siding with the cops and charging too high) seek a higher charge than the situation or evidence can make a case for.

    • Mickey Darius says:

      Actually, Charlie, they do…for LESS than that even

    • 50% of ther story.. mmm strange not much was different then what was reported at the townhall.. you can listen for yourself..

  5. Has anyone bothered to find out who committed the “swatting”? Not that it excuses the homicidal pig(s) who murdered him.

  6. Another case of police not knowing the difference between a tazer and a gun.

    • How are they suppose to know if it’s a taser or not? It was holstered on his hip and looks similar to a gun. This situation happened at night, approximately 75ft away from each other. The officers has asked him to show his hands, but he drew for his taser instead. What are the cops suppose to do?

      • Really? What are they supposed to do? How about get their lies straight. How about not killing people? The police had many options besides lethal force. Why would a thoughful, streetwise, Buddhist, young man eating his food draw on the cops? That sounds like the police are using the standard narrative they always use to justify killing an unarmed person. Why did the folks call the cops on Alejandro when his taser wasn’t drawn and he was just chilling by himself not bothering anyone? Why did they freak and think he was suspicious? Can’t you smell the stink of that? Does it bother you that police routinely target people of color in SF and elsewhere often resulting in deadly force and no or little consequences for the offending officer? If you can’t see a pattern here..

        • Are they not allowed to protect themselves when someone reaches for something on them after being told to show their hands? Are they suppose to wait and see what it is? What if it is a gun and the person fires off a couple shots and his a police officer, or worse yet, an innocent bystander? What then?

          What others options are these that police could’ve done? They already ordered him to show his hands. He didn’t. Instead, he reached for his taser. He shouldn’t have done that. Once he did, the police not knowing what it is, and assuming it’s a firearm since it was holstered, fired upon him. Why would anyone reach for something on them when being confronted by a police officer and being told to show their hands?

  7. Mateo Sari says:

    A sad and tragic story, but this article leaves out important details, and fans the flames of racism. From what I read, varied “gentrifiers” saw a man waving “a gun”, yelling out to no one, and acting erratically. Of course they should call the police. And, when police yelled to him to show his hands, he pulled out his “gun”.

    What greatly troubles me is how many times he was shot, and that must be explained and justified. I wish cops were trained differently, and carried non-lethal bullets, but I also wish that people would do as the police instruct -and not reach for their weapons instead.

    • Alex W. V. says:

      All throughout the world there are security guards that stand at the doorways to busy marketplaces. They are heavily armed and are payed well to keep a close eye on would be suicide bombers. If they suspect someone of attempting to rush through the checkpoint they will tackle the would be assistant, the guards job is attempting to create a human wall between the bomber and the innocents. These men know it is there job to lay down their lives to protect those that need protection.
      Meanwhile, in SF, men payed to do essentially the same thing, have time and time been shown to shoot first no matter what. Had even a single officer followed protocol during any of these instances, lives would not have been lost. If Alex was yelling at nobody and waving a taser it sounds to me like maybe a good person was having a bad day. Maybe having a moment where he felt less than normal, something that happens to even the best people. The fact remains the same no matter how you approach it: of he was waving a taser, then he could have been tased. And if he didn’t shoot first, the police should never have fired. If only our law enforcement officers were willing to make a human shield to protect the innocent, and lawfully protect even those perhaps posing a danger to themselves, maybe Alex would still be alive?

    • Mateo — I appreciate what you are saying, and I only wish it were that simple. Whatever reports were called in, it is up to police to determine their veracity and act accordingly. There were multiple protocols that were ignored or bypassed. Those protocols have been created specifically to avoid lethal outcomes. Unfortunately, history demonstrates that police lie to cover their tracks in cases like this. And they utilize those lies to evade accountability for individual acts, and evade scrutiny in the more general sense.

  8. Sounds like the truth and Jason Wallach are strangers. Next time he should focus on posting the whole story instead of trying to stir up outrage.

  9. yoshidabeen@gmail.com says:

    The article leaves out a lot and is misleading . Looks like the author and co- author have propagandist beef to grind.. CAN WE SAY YELLOW CHEAP JOURNALISM ??
    The title “Gentrifiers get suspicious “. How do you define gentrifier ? And were you on the scene when it went down ?
    I think we know your real axe to grind Mr. Davey D !!! Rather than scouring the internet for all the rascist white people ..let me save you some time ; just look in the mirror

    • Learn to read ….and make more accurate statements


        • mrDaveyd says:

          LOL John I didn’t know Bernal Heights was the hood..Its looking to be a pretty upscale neighborhood that most people can no longer afford and the gentlemen shot was a hard working honor student.. I think the problem being focused on are the entities that led to his death.. The blame is squarely placed where it should be..

          • Wasn t referring to Bernal Heights…..once again hearing only what fits your agenda…. If your so disenchanted with the police force why don’t you give some facts or data instead insulting everyones intelligence with a plagiarized half written story !!!!
            Oh, by the way are there upwardly mobile blacks or hispanics gentrifiers as well ?? Did you do a full background check on all the people walking their dogs and calling in to make sure they weren’t quote born in Bernal Heights. You aint’ fooling me dude !

          • mrDaveyd says:

            Your free to engage the author of the piece he’s posted up on this thread and did an interview the next day further explaining his piece. Thank U..

  10. Funny how the author of this article completely ignores important facts.

    1) Nieto was not just eating a burrito when he was shot. He was acting erratically, described by citizens who called 911, was pacing back and forth in a park, I believe, and had a gun on his hip (obviously we know now that it was a taser, but nobody is going to go up to him and ask what it is on his hip if they become suspicious of him).

    2) Officers told him to show his hands, instead he draws his taser.

    What else are the cops suppose to do in this situation? Wait to see what it is? If they do it could be a gun and the shooter already has an advantage on the cops by firing a couple shots before they know what it is. Sorry, when you are told to show your hands, you don’t reach for something on your person, especially that is in the shape of a gun and holstered. At that moment, the officers have the right to shoot and kill.

    • ^^^^ The above response almost certainly comes from an SFPD troll that is either in solidarity with the SFPD narrative about this incident or directly paid by them to influence people’s perceptions. 1) The word “erratic” is a subjective term that can carry a ton of cultural bias. I am white, so what “erratic” gestures might motivate me to call police may not be erratic for someone else. My fears are generated from a different matrix. Until we get past this subjectivity, the use of that term (erratic) will have racist implications. 2) There is really nothing out there to corroborate that cops told Alex to raise his hands, or that Alex pulled the tazer he was wearing. We know that cops consistently lie to cover their actions and evade accountability. So far, nobody who has stated these allegations has been under oath at the time they stated it.

      • Thank you, Jason.

      • Thank you Jason! I know folks who knew Alejandro at City and elsewhere and he was a peaceful, thoughtful person. He certainly did not deserve to be shot. The trolls on here crying foul and ‘racism’ apparently have some history to catch up on. Ever hear of Andy López?

      • Resort to name calling, that’s very mature. So, I’m curious, why am I considered a troll? I didn’t come on here with the intent to stir up anything. I came on here because I read an article that left out some vital information.

        Jason, if you’re going to report something, report everything. Don’t leave out important information because it doesn’t suit your agenda.

  11. Doktor Jeep says:

    Before this becomes solely a race issue, please keep in mind that this “gentrifier” culture is a problem that exceeds the boundaries of race and class.
    Out in the “country” these same kinds of people will move out there and build their house on some ex-farmland and if they see a gun or hear someone shooting on their property they freak out and embellish their call to the police. In the sticks, guns are common. Almost every property has one. And yeah, it may be mostly white people out there, but these yuppy gentrifier types are not couching their fears in skin color alone. ANYTHING will spook them.

    Overall we have the problem of militarized police who escalate situations into murder and get away with it. In the less densely populated regions there’s at least some foreknowledge with the locals: the cops know who’s who and will know that when Mr Panicky-Balless-Yuppie calls up they know better than to join in with the panic but this too changes over time as police get more money for each arrest and they like to take guns from people too.

    If we really want to change anything, in addition to addressing the horrible operant conditioning training methods that turn police into killbots (See the works of Col. David Grossman for reference), we need to get this certain segment, this culture, of “gentrifier types” to understand that this world is not their personal oyster and they should be vigilant against their own ignorance.

    This might be a stretch though, as many of them claim to be socially conscious when it suits them but where the rubber meets the road their own welfare comes first and this privileged pampered culture has no sense of consequence.

  12. Ellen opie says:

    A tragedy. But how it relates to gentrification is beyond me. If I am
    White & see a guy on the hill acting tweaky w/a gun, am
    I supposed to NOT be concerned? My boss’s wife was jogging up
    There 1 day about 15 yrs ago & was attacked &
    Stabbed some 15 times. Crazy shit happens up there. I am
    Always very vigilant up there. I would have called cops too. And race is irrelevant. On Andover our worst problems w/crime &
    Drugs have been w/the white folks.

  13. I really appreciate your article and was very saddened to hear about the death of this young man. I would like to hear more details about the story. I know the justice system is a racist one but this seems extreme.

  14. I find it fascinating how I’m getting updates to others’ comments being approved, but mine has not since yesterday.

    Says a lot.

  15. What if it was true that Mr. Nieto (Rest in Peace/love to his family) was actually looking to hurt someone and the police did their job? And I mean *what if* ALL the evidence that is shown shows that this guy unfortunately needed help and it resulted to this unfortunate situation?

    Would it still be a fault of someone’s race that isn’t the same as him? Would it still be the fault of gentrifiers? It sounds to me like everyone defending or offending this is looking for fault at someone.

    What if it came out that he was actually just having lunch at the hill and was falsely assumed as a “bad person”. Would it be the gentrifiers fault again? Perhaps a dog that barked at him? Who’s fault would it be?

    In this country, it’s always someone’s fault. Think about that.

  16. Mr. Roberts says:

    the police don’t just shoot people for eating a burrito in a security uniform. I’m sure there is a lot left out of the story. Sad that a life was lost. Written by a political activist with his own agenda. I’m sure the officers didn’t wake up that day and say ” hey, let’s go and shoot and kill someone, then we can have our guns taken away, placed on desk duty for a year, wait for a grand jury of citizens to determine if shooting was justified or unjustified and risk spending doing jail time. The amount of stress thinking you may go to jail, lose your job, house, family for a decision you have to make in seconds. Yes, I’m sure the police said after knowing all the consequences ” lets murder a person eating a burrito. Smh

    • mrDaveyd says:

      LOL Stop Mr Roberts.. dont make outlandish statements and try to deflect from what was an indefensible act.. there’s a big difference between wanting to shoot someone and being negligent because you were 1-under qualified 2-scared 3-have a propensity to fly off the handle and not judge things correctly..

  17. Wow golly-gee Davey. I guess the moral of this story are that all cops are bad and all white people are evil. Boy you have me convinced now !!

  18. I’ve thrown myself agains the machine more than once, yet you have to understand the facts of the matter before jumping off the deep end with an article like this.

    A statement issued by the SFPD on March 21, about three hours after the shooting, said officers had arrived at the park in response to “911 calls of a male subject with a gun.” Police “encountered a male subject with a weapon,” the statement went on. “The male subject pointed a weapon at the officers, and multiple officers discharged their firearms.” (In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Deputy Police Chief Lyn Tomioka indicated that he “appeared to draw a weapon.”) He was pronounced dead, the statement noted, “and an additional weapon was found.”

    In other words, if you point a weapon at a police officer you *WILL* get killed. Every time. No matter what.


    • That is if u believe that account..U do, the community doesnt.. end of story

      • Were you at the town hall meeting like I was? Maybe we’re seeing different things here.

        If you pull a weapon on a cop it’s instant suicide. It’s the product of a country without gun control.

        It’s difficult to see this objectively if you’re IN the community, but standing outside of it (just for one objective second) it’s pretty clear what happened here. If it happened again the outcome would be the same, every single time.

        The account was pretty simple: 911 call for domestic disturbance involving a gun. Cops show up, man points weapon at cops.

        • no excuses for this killing Grahamn.. no excuses whatsoever, u know it, they know it..

          • Excuses? You gotta get that word out of this debate, if that’s what this is.

            A cop killing someone for pulling a weapon on them is part of the job description. We all know this. Notice how there’s no justification in there?

            In short, see this for what it is:

            1. Cops called for domestic disturbance involving weapon
            2. Alejandro provoked cops
            3. Alejandro pulled weapon on cops
            4. Cops killed Alejandro

            Number 4 will always happen 100% of the time. Number 2 and 3 combined produces the end result. I’m not justifying this, I’m saying the equation of this math problem makes sense, unfortunately. Every time.


      • By the way, I’m not outside the community, I’m IN the community.

        • Yeah Graham. Why don’t you ask if Mr.COOK IS INSIDE THE COMMUNITY. aka davey d.
          Sounds like he is 100% sure exactly what went down.. Maybe he is an eyewitness and will testify in court

          • It’s definitely not cut and dry no matter how you look at it. But to be complete non-objective about anything doesn’t make sense, this included.

            Anyone who draws on a cop dies, especially if what they’re drawing was said to be a gun, and looks like one.

            I was at the town hall meeting. The taser that’s designed to look like a gun… looks like a gun. : (


          • mrDaveyd says:

            Again Grahamn all that you say makes sense if u believe Alex actually drew his taser… which makes absolutely no sense at all… the cops were 75 feet away which means a taser wouldn’t work. It also means the cops identified themselves and he said fuck it.. lemme pull out my taser knowing that they would shoot him.. This is a man who was studying to be in law enforcement.. 3- Alex was covering up for a crime.. a guy with no police record or anything like that decides in broad daylight to point his taser at police who have surrounded him, knowing they would shoot..what crime did he commit robbery? stick ups? drug dealing? what?? 4-Alex wanted to die at the hands of police.. He just decided this was the way to do it..

            No Grahamn the police were out of pocket anyway you slice it, no one is gonna point a taser at police who are 75 feet away and have u surrounded…This is why they tried floating out the story that he was mentally ill.. Of course we have to find out what mental illness depression? paranoa? PSTD? How many of these mental illness lead to suicide by cop which is basically what you are suggesting when he pulled his gun on 3 cops who were 75 feet away and had him surrounded… So what now? we need more info to surface? Are we gonna say he had weed in his body like they did Trayvon? Cocaine? Speed? Alcohol? pain killers?? Please.. Ain’t no one pulled a gun.. There’s a long list of unarmed men and women shot by police who supposedly pulled guns on police and each time we had similar dialogue, with folks lambasting the dead and dismissing any one who doubted the police version of the story..

            Lastly I saw the entire tape of that townhall- I have the footage we posted a lot of it.. . I have the full audio..I saw the presentation of the taser theory and saw the pictures’.. Not sure if those were pictures of Alex’s actual taser, but pray tell what did I miss? Better yet what did Jason who wrote the story and was at both the vigil and townhall miss? What did the crew from Poor Magazine who provided the audio and footage miss? They all tell the same story?

          • mrDaveyd says:

            If called to testify I will gladly do my duty John..

  19. Yes. Generic “white gentrifiers” should be included in the list of people that killed this man. Clear line of responsibility. Nothing shoehorned about it.

    • mrDaveyd says:

      No not generic, just the one who was suspicious and fearful..

      • Got it, now I see your angle. You don’t believe what was said.

        I don’t believe in conspiracies at all and I believe what the police said to be true.

        Given that they were called by a third party for a domestic disturbance by someone with a GUN acting erratically, the story makes even more sense.

        I get that your angle is hardcore counter-cultulre and government, but realize that we’re living at the lowest point of human conflict in human history.

        Life is pretty good if all the issues we’re experiencing are downed airlines, one person being killed in a Russian crisis and kids rolling the dice with cops lives’.


        • mrDaveyd says:

          Grahamn of course you believe what they (police) said and overlooked the logic of what was laid out. Its too disturbing for folks like you to think otherwise.. Its hard to reconcile this notion that the ‘erratic guy’ who works security, has a taser, no police record and no problems on the job just decided to point his laser at 3 cops. Don’t backpedal Graham and suddenly try to put your head in the sand because the truth is too hard to take..

          First u claimed I wasn’t at the meeting and you were hence you had information I didn’t.. So I asked u specifically what did I miss since I have a full copy of the meeting on tape and audio? I saw the same presentation you saw and walked through the same narration laid out by Chief Suhr. What did I miss?

          The narration goes ..A man (Alex Nieto) pointed a gun, 3 cops flanked out 75 feet away shot him when he pointed this gun.. That’s the narrative right? Did you hear something different or do I need to post the video which is already on line.. Suhr showed the taser which he said looked like a gun from 75 feet away. So lets be clear here Alex didn’t own a gun he had a taser and this honor student who wanted to be in law enforcement pointed his taser at armed police officers?? he did this because the police say he was “erractic”.. All erratci people point tasers at cops..right??

          So walk me through this Graham.. Is it ‘hardcore counter culture’ to ask if the 3 Officers identified themselves upon seeing Alex?? They say they did.. Were the officers in uniform so Alex knew who he was pointing ‘his gun at'(note Suhr referred to Alex’s taser as ‘gun’.. He did this a couple of times in the presentation)..So yes the officers were in uniform. We are still following the narrative..

          Alex is studying to be a probation officer has no arrest record and no weapons history.. Are we still in conspiracy land??

          Alex pointed gun, officers had seconds to react from 75 feet away in a 3 on 1 situation..This is what Chief Suhr said right??

          Police shoot Alex..because they feared he had a weapon.. That’s the police narrative..

          So the question becomes why did Alex point his TASER at police? Did he expect the police to not shoot? Be scared and retreat? Or shoot him dead? Are we still being hardcore counter culture or are you, Grahamn just having hard time dealing with a sensible set of questions?

          So if we follow the police narrative Alex was behaving erratically which implies his erratic behavior was such that he went and aimed a TASER at police.. So he must’ve thought his taser was gun (erratic thinking).. He was drunk or high and used poor judgment.. From what we know he doesn’t have a history of this..But I guess we’ll see when autospy comes out.. I can see your hoping that it has something incriminating to explain away what was egregious..

          Perhaps Alex wanted to commit suicide.. Is that what we’re gonna hang our hats on? The suicide theory? Alex was erractic and wanted to die and the 3 poor police had no choice because they feared for their lives?.. (are we still in hardcore conspiracy land?)

          Now Chief Suhr offered none of these as possible explanations.. He simply said they got a call from someone who said a man was behaving erratically?.. That behavior said he was pacing back and forth and throwing punches at the air and he had a gun on him.. The taser was at his side but wasn’t pointing at anyone ..

          Second call said he was pacing back and forth..

          3rd call said he was eating.. So we went from a guy who was ‘erractic’ because he was pacing to one who was sitting down and eating as cops arrived and he just decided to stand up and point his taser at police?? And you believe this because the police said so?? and in Grahamn’s mind the police never lie? right?

          Well Grahamn wasn’t a year and half ago 56 cases had to be dismissed because SFPD officers were caught on tape raiding houses without warrants falsifying reports and other outlandish acts? 56 different cases. So why do you believe this department? Chief Suhr was police chief when this happened. He didn’t take the initiative to weed these officers out, it was public defender Adachi who got a hold of a tape showing the wrong doing. It was the FBI that came came in… This means when 56 different people said they were done dirty by SFPD, people like you Grahamn disbelieved them..You probably labeled them hardcore counter culture conspiracy theorists, just like your doing now.

          Is everyone a counter culture hardcore conspiracy theorists? Everyone in the room that night? The community? The author of the piece? The people from the newspaper? all of them are counter culture nuts? The family too? Why? because they question the police narrative put forth by a force that has proven its willing to lie and send people to jail on false charges 56 different times..Ok got it

          • 1. People call cops due to a domestic disturbance involving someone acting erratically with a gun
            2. Police arrive
            3. Man points weapon at police
            4. Police kill someone with weapon pointed at them

            It’s easy to go around in circles on this one, but it can be simplified.

            You doubt the taser showed at the meeting was the actual taser…

            I think you’re already in the deep end at this point, but it seems you’re comfortable (and perhaps enjoy) with the deep end of these things.

            Like I said, you’re embedded in first world problems. Amazing problems to have, I might add.

            We should be so lucky to rap about first world problems and a death that occurred from someone playing dice with the lives of police.


          • mrDaveyd says:

            As I thought Graham u have no answers to the points raised and have resorted to name calling and deflection as you tried to hang on to one point which is my doubt it was his actual taser… Which is not unusual if u go to press conferences which I do.. often they show you pictures and not the actual evidence..and that’s done for a variety of reasons.. But again I direct you back to the larger set of questions..

            what was erratic about his behavior when the cops arrived?? This is crucial because the last call to the police noted he was sitting down eating..2-His erratic behavior was what? Him waving a gun?? Nope.. Him talking to himself and throwing punches while wearing his taser which had legally ‘Yes’

            So within the 3 calls the police show up and dude upon seeing them points his taser at police who claim they were 75 feet away.. That means a taser wouldn’t work.. Why would Alex point a weapon that doesn’t work? Your answer Grahamn. He was erratic..What does that mean?

            Instead of dealing with that line of questioning you start deflecting by first suggesting I’m a hardcore counter culture guy.. what does that mean Graham? That I don’t take a the police’s word for an incident? Why do you take their word for it when they had 56 cases thrown out for lying? That’s not made up stuff Graham.. That’s documented and on file.. Do u need links or was I counter culture when I reported on that a year and half ago..

            Now you come along with gibberish about being on the deep end and embedded in First World Problems.. What are First World Problems Graham? What deep end am I on? Questioning a cast of characters who lied and swore to God they weren’t lying when questions were raised about cases we now know they lied about??

    • How do you know they were quote gentrifiers ? How do you know they weren’t born in the area ? And if they just moved in what difference does it make ?
      What is a gentrifier by the way in your definition !!

  20. Sounds to me dAVEY YOU GOT SOME PERSONAL RACIAL ISSUES AND HATRED OF YOUR OWN that you got to deal with

  21. Pap. Nice comment. Thanks for clarifying white to all of us. Generic as well. Well done that should bring the community close together.


  1. […] LiveLeak Google Gentrifier is still a fully-operational program — complete with a snazzy new maps-based interface — funded in part by special tax breaks made available exclusively to select wealthy megacorporations. When Google comes to town, everybody wins. […]