PREVIOUSLY:
- Albert Arzola, 19, killed by Anaheim Police Last Night (Dec. 7)
- The Scary Gun: APD Responds to My story (Dec. 14, updated after Dec. 15 community meeting)
There were technical problems, but we finally have the video of the big community “informational” meeting the Anaheim Police put on Monday Dec. 15 at City Hall, to address the community’s concerns about the Dec. 6 killing of 19-year-old Albert Arzola (and wounding of 18-year-old Emmanuel Cordova.) Also yesterday we got the “Critical Incident Report” video from the police, and it’s really something; we’ll look at that after this:
Police spokesman Matt Sutter told us mostly what he’d already written in a press release five days earlier. New things he was able to tell us was:
- What the cops were chasing Albert for (before killing him) was SUSPICION OF GRAFFITI.
- Sutter did admit that the cops were chasing Albert (and his friends) in an unmarked car, although they were in uniform – he doesn’t know if they had tinted windows.
- The shooting cop claims that Albert had just “produced” a gun, whatever that means. although Sutter couldn’t say what was meant by “produced” or if it was the same gun that was “found” on the grass near Albert later.
- The two cops who shot Albert & Emmanuel are both on paid leave.
- It was at this meeting that Sutter STOPPED calling the gun an “automatic weapon” (after being widely ridiculed for that by gun nuts.).
Things Sutter would NOT tell us, either because he didn’t know or because it would “compromise the ongoing investigations” included:
- The names of the officer who killed Albert, and the officer who shot Emmanuel.
- If these officers had a history/relationship with Albert, or a record of other bad incidents or complaints.
- What it meant to “produce” this gun, and was this the same gun they later claimed to have found “near him on the grass?”
- How many times Albert was shot, and where.
- Various technical medical information that he didn’t know.
We learned a lot more from the folks in the audience – witnesses, friends, relatives, attorneys, experts and activists of different kinds. So let me guide you to what I think are HIGH POINTS of this meeting, and sorry there are a lot of them. At least twelve.
High Points of the “Informational” Meeting
- 6:49 to 10:49 – Six very young CHILDREN were “detained” and handcuffed on the sidewalk “as part of the ongoing investigation?” One boy was forced to pee on the sidewalk!
- 11:30 to 15:51 – Where (on his body/head) was Albert shot? The majority disagrees with you-all. Was the car unmarked? Yes.
- 15:48 – Girl asks what life-saving measures were used?
- 17:00 – David Zenger weighs in, and addresses the three councilmembers present (Ashleigh, Carlos, Norma)
- 19:50 to 22:00 – Arty Castillo asks if the shooting officer KNEW Albert, had history with him?
- 22:45 – the family’s lawyer (James DeSimone) gets Sutter on record on some things, and demands an independent investigation.
- 28:00 – A former NYPD cop questions their aggressive reaction to graffiti.
- 30:00 – A young man expresses outrage that the shooting cops are on paid leave, chanting ensues.
- 32:28 – DeSimone again, tries to get Sutter to promise to release unedited bodycam footage.
- 35:30 – Duane Roberts asks about fingerprints on the gun, and other questions based on his background in criminology.
- 38:55 – Marc Herbert as always asks good questions – how many young Latinos have been killed by police in last 20 years? Why is this meeting not being broadcast or recorded?
- 41:30 – Adrian Stephen, an EMS technician, raises a lot of questions about their “life-saving measures.”
- 45:50 – Albert’s aunt ties things up fiercely, and the chanting begins.
OR you could just watch the whole thing, your call.
And the Critical Incident Video was released yesterday,
as promised:
It’s a lot shorter than what we’re used to, cuz I guess they did this one quick – none of those long solemn introductions, or narrators saying “This is what you’ll see here.” In the introductory text they don’t mention graffiti (which sort of “didn’t poll well” at the Community Meeting) they say “suspected criminal activity.” Then we’re treated to a long 2 minutes of post-killing radio traffic complaining about all the witnesses “not being compliant” and having to shut down the street.
It’s not till the 3-minute mark that they show some security footage from the Amigos Market (a few doors down from Albert’s house), from right before the killing. Guess what? It wasn’t even Albert doing graffiti, it was (presumably) some friend of his, Albert’s just walking home all nonchalant from his job at the Anaheim Ducks. And an unmarked car drives up with tinted windows, and right at 3:45 you see the two cops pulling up to Albert’s place and tearing out of their vehicle like they’re about to stop some horrible violent crime! (Not commit one.)
This is how fast it-all happened, it’s hard to imagine how there could have been a “struggle” or a gun “produced.” There are 30 seconds before the sound kicks in, when the killing cop turns on his bodycam while he’s still in the car – and before the sound even kicks in Albert is already dead and everyone is yelling. Here, I’m gonna excerpt just the killing. You can see the chaos too of the shooting cop, wearing his bodycam, tumbling down the stairs and sprinting backwards on the lawn, it’s hard to pick much out clearly.
The guy just CHARGED out of the car, gun drawn, ran up the stairs, somehow fell down them again and shot Albert 2 or 3 times all within seconds, ran back onto the lawn, and started yelling at Albert’s dad and sister to “GET ON THE FUCKING GROUND!” All because one of Albert’s friends had painted some graffiti? And this is how quick this cop killed Albert, there wasn’t even time for the sound on the bodycam to kick in. Yes, the gun is apparently lying there on the lawn a few feet from Albert (they’ve stopped calling it an assault weapon) but it’s not clear exactly how it got there.
There’s more in the police video if you want to see the paramedics show up ten minutes after Albert died and try to revive a dead man, or if you wanna see Emmanuel get hit in the head by a beanbag round, which coulda killed him (“Was that a beanbag or a bullet? That shit was hard as fuck!”) But we’ve seen the most important part.
I’d like to end with this young man, a co-worker of Albert’s who worked with him at the Ducks, and made it to the Council meeting the day after the “Informational Meeting.” Apparently Albert had just gotten paid, and the police seized all his money like it was drug money or something. In conclusion this young man, the best he knows how, he asks for an independent investigation into the killing:

He didn’t brandish it Vern. He produced it as in revealed it or withdrawing it from secretion.
The excuse about having to enter the house after the shooting to determine if anyone was injured by gun shot – if that is what I heard Sutter say – appears to be BOGUS. That is not exigent circumstances unless perhaps someone yelled “help, I’ve been shot!” From within the home immediately after the shooting.
I think Albert may have already been wrestling with one officer when the other officer stumbled about the stairs.
And taggers have shot folks.
https://orangecountyda.org/press/gang-member-sentenced-to-40-years-to-life-for-shooting-and-attempting-to-murder-father-of-five-while-tagging-gang-graffiti-in-victims-neighborhood/
And the Ducks didn’t play on the 6th. They played on the 7th against the Blackhawks.
The December 6th event at the pond er Honda Center was postponed. That doesn’t mean Albert wasn’t employed there but he wasn’t anywhere near there that night for work before the shooting.
https://www.hondacenter.com/events/eden-mu%C3%B1oz/
You don’t fucking know what his job was there or if there was some kind of work to do on the 6th. His friends all said he just came home from work, and this other guy said he worked with him “for the Ducks.” Do you think you’re discrediting this kid, and why?
I’m just saying there wasn’t a duck event there and there wasn’t a reason for him to be there. I know folks wno have worked for the Ducks. No game. No work. But it can be verified from his employer not his friends Vern.
You call yourself an attorney? God, I’d hate to be one of your clients!
Just ignore.
Pull the plug.
Eric’s still out there, in comments I pulled the plug on, claiming that the young man in the last video, the guy who worked with Albert, said that Albert “made his money fair and clean, mostly.”
He did not fucking say that. He said, “He was very proud to work for the Anaheim Ducks mostly. [end of sentence, breath] He got his money fair, and he got it clean…”
[Yes Eric that does make sense. Albert had other jobs besides the Ducks, or had other jobs during the time this guy knew him. People do have more than one job these days.]
What a waste of a mind. I’m talking about Eric’s mind, trying as hard as possible to discredit the kid who got killed.
Only a damn fool makes enemies intentionally and just for the perversity of it.
Ok Albert Jr. was not on probation at the time but I confirm that he had just been charged on 7/30/2025 for defacing a wall. Ocsc case no. 25NM13739.
Both could be true Vern. He could have hit up a wall on his way home from work.
1. Nobody ever said he never did anything wrong in his life, maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. It’s the cops’ job to prove that the kid needed chasing down and killing, why do you want to do their job for them?
Plus I don’t think you watched the video of the graffiti where it was clearly not Albert but someone else doing it, Albert was like 30 feet away, walking home, not even watching.
Whether he previously did bad things or not is irrelevant since the cops probably didn’t know who he was. Even if they did, the problem is whether he was doing something wrong at the time of his killing, and whether graffiti warranted the escalation, the main point I was trying to make to the elected Three Silent Sphinxes at the meeting.