Essay by Gilbert Aguirre
Parts One & Two
Published 02/03/2022 11:05 Pm PST
Dorner’s Story
“The warranty of sanity is worth only as much as the social processes that generate it. I perceive a difference, however, between the collective outrages that we sometimes label madness and the idiosyncratic act of an individual “ Robert M. Cover, 1982
This is an analysis of ex-LAPD officer and former Navy reservist Christopher Dorner who was entrapped and killed by police in 2013. Southern California police conducted a manhunt for Dorner after he was the prime suspect in the murder of former LAPD captain Randal Quan’s daughter and her fiancée. Dorner posted an eighteen page manifesto on Facebook with the opening lines:
“From: Christopher Jordan Dorner /7648
To: America
Subj: Last resort
Regarding CF# 07-004281”
The case file number at the end of this citation refers to the complaint levied against Dorner that lead to him being fired by LAPD. This complaint was levied against Dorner, in his perspective, because he called out the abuse of his partner Teresa Evans who kicked a handcuffed, mentally ill man in the face. The reason Dorner sees the complaint levied against him as retaliation is because the department claimed he fabricated the incident entirely, and that lying about Teresa Evans’ conduct is the reason for his termination (Dorner,2013).
During the investigation that lead to Dorner’s termination, Dorner claims to have revealed a conflict of interest amongst the Board of Rights judges that were to decide on his case, as the judges were friends and close colleagues to Evans, but of course these conflicts of interest were undressed (2). Thus, in response to having lost his job, Dorner states,
“I have exhausted all available means at obtaining my name back. I have attempted all legal court efforts within appeals at the Superior Courts and California Appellate courts. This is my last resort. The LAPD has suppressed the truth and it has now lead to deadly consequences.” Christopher Dorner, 2013.
The feeling of betrayal, and disillusionment of the prestige of empire because of how its corruption affected him, lead to Dorner’s individual acts of violence for personal redemption. After killing the daughter of the former LAPD captain who represented Dorner in his case, as well as her fiancée, Dorner was traveling east through Southern California and had shootouts with cops in Corona and Riverside. Including Dorner himself and the couple he killed, five people died in the process of the manhunt. Dorner was finally entrapped in Big Bear, California and surrounded by police in a cabin. They set the cabin aflame with Dorner inside, he was reportedly found with a gunshot wound in his head, likely fired by Dorner himself.
State Violence “Sovereign is he who decides on the exception”
—Carl Schmitt
Abolitionist scholar Dylan Rodriguez makes the important clarification that “police brutality” is a ham-fisted term, that rather the brutality of the police is simply cops doing their job. In his own words, Rodriguez argues, the term police brutality “is often used to refer to violent police practices that are utterly, ritually sanctioned by law”. Dorner speaks to this in his critique of Latino cops targeting and harassing Latino immigrants— because of their marginalized status in the United States empire, law sanctions more violent consequences for undocumented citizens. To this point, the former police chief Randal Quan— who represented Dorner in his case to the Board of Rights— and whom’s daughter Dorner killed, refers to himself as “a cop who had been respectful to everyone he arrested” (LA Times, 2013), the irony of this statement does not escape this writer just as it should not escape the reader. It is tremendously easy for a cop, whose occupation permits him to wield and exercise power as he sees fit, to view himself as having engaged in respectability politics while ruining the lives of others— this is simply what the job of being an arm of the state requires and incentivizes. As an arm of the state, the former LAPD captain Randal Quan is illusioned by his role of power, and is unable to see the contradiction of respectfully enforcing law to arrest and imprison the populace he claims to protect. Quan was so illusioned, he couldn’t imagine how someone, anyone, would want to retaliate against him or his family as a result of the “respect” he showed while subjugating Los Angeles community members to state violence.
In searching for Dorner after he was known to be the perpetrator of the murder of Randal Quan’s daughter Monica Quan, and her fiancée Keith Lawrence who was a Public Safety Officer for USC, Southern California police were on high alert (Research 15). And, as police on high alert typically equates to extreme violence without provocation, nearly killed three innocent civilians in Torrence, California.
The first women, who made the mistake of driving a truck while Southern California police were conducting a manhunt, were delivering newspapers in the early hours of the morning. The women, 71 year old Emma Hernandez and her 47 year old daughter Margie Carranza were going about their daily shift, delivering newspapers to a house that was under high security due to one of the residents being a high ranking officer. The truck Hernandez and her daughter were driving in was shot at over one hundred times (Sasha Goldstein, 2019).
A 4.2 million dollar settlement was eventually reached for Hernandez and Carranza. However, the discourse at the time makes it clear that police feel entitled to their power, and thus should only rarely face consequences. A “use-of-force expert” interviewed for the Los Angeles Times critiqued the large settlement, because “a payout of this magnitude typically comes in cases with crippling injuries and deaths” (Andrew Blankstein LA TImes 2013). This reality reveals that the motive of operations for the police is, again, not on accountability or public safety. The women shot at over one hundred times by seven different cops, each sustaining gunshot wounds, is somehow not enough damage or terror to justify a high settlement.
This sly, disingenuous discourse that surrounds— not “police brutality,” but policing— is what Christopher Dorner was disillusioned with. The lack of accountability sustained by state violence and disseminated through mass media and pseudo-intellectual rightwing discourse exist to reinforce the idea that police have a right to exist, and that their existence is somehow separate from, and not intrinsic to, extreme violence and repression.
Resistance
“Any group that seeks the transformation of the surrounding social world must evolve a mechanism for such change. There must be a theory and practice of apostolic ministry to the unconverted, a theory and practice of Leninist selection of cadres and class-consciousness- raising activity, or a theory and practice of legislation and deliberative politics. Of course, some associations - most limited-purpose ones - strive for small change in a world understood to be unproblematic if ill defined.” —Robert M. Cover
In this section I will be critiquing Christopher Dorner’s attempt at resistance. As I have made clear my support and admiration for Dorner’s resistance, here I will critique the individualist nature of his actions by placing it in context with an editorial released by The Black Panther Party’s newspaper, The Black Panther, in 1968. Although he sought to wage a war against the police, his resistance was shortsighted and not based in firm ideological ground, despite his staunch commitment to egalitarianism, informed by his liberal conception of race and indoctrination into the empire’s nomos, namely the illusion of American exceptionalism and the prestige of empire. In Dorner’s manifesto, he offers the problematic assertion, “I’m not an aspiring rapper, I’m not a gang member, I’m not a dope dealer, I don’t have multiple babies momma’s,” this inclusion in the manifesto functions as Dorner’s attempt to separate himself from racist stereotypes of Black men. Instead of critiquing these caricatures as problematic and rooted in white supremacist ideology, Dorner repeats them as truisms, so to say “I agree with those descriptions of The Other— believe me when I tell you I am not them— I am one of you.” In the manifesto, he continues; “I am an American by choice, I am a son, I am a brother, I am a military service member, I am a man who has lost complete faith in the system, when the system betrayed, slandered, and libeled me”.
I draw this point to critique Dorner’s ideology, which throughout his manifesto ranges from radical, to liberal, and even to prideful of the US empire. His logical ground, firmly against corruption but unable to see that the empire he praises is itself corrupt, lead him to confusion and anger— these feelings are what produced Dorner’s militant, shortsighted action.
So, what is resistance in the wild west? And where did Dorner go wrong? I will answer these questions with an excerpt from The Black Panther from a larger editorial entitled “Correcting Mistaken Ideas.” In the editorial, written by a Black Panther member by the name of Capt. Crutch, the writer critiques the hyper-militant ideology of members of the Black Liberation Army— asserting that their refusal to work on propaganda and community outreach renders them useless and a threat to the revolutionary movement. A list he provides is pertinent to understand the misguided base of Dorner’s resistance. Captain Crutch states:
“The sources of the purely militant viewpoint are:
A low political level
The mentality of mercenaries.
Over confidence in the military strength and absence of confidence in the strength of the masses of the people. This arises from the preceding three.”
By applying this critique to Dorner’s ideology, which he presents in his manifesto, and observing its impact on how his resistance manifested materially, we can better understand where Dorner went wrong. In observing a critique of The Black Liberation Army by The Black Panther Party, we are able to see how a political organization aimed at revolution, which understands “military affairs are only one means of accomplishing political tasks… We must not confine ourselves merely to fighting,” (Crunch) can work to provide an educational basis that would quell the purely militant viewpoint, and provide a network of resistance, as opposed to individual and isolated acts of violence against the oppressor.
The “low political level” Crutch critiques of the militant viewpoint are present in Dorner’s manifesto, as Dorner praises corrupt politicians such as “honorable President George H.W. Bush”; affirms to Hillary Clinton that “much like your husband, Bill, you will be one of the greatest… He was always my favorite president”; provides encouragement to Governor Chris Christie, stating “you’re the only person I would like to see in the White House in 2016 other than Hillary” (Crutch, Capt. 2017); and his misguided praise of Joe Biden, stating, “I’ve always been a fan of yours and consider you one of the few genuine and charismatic politicians” (11). Moreover, along with displaying a low political level in his manifesto, Dorner also displays the mentality of a mercenary, as his direct action against the LAPD, he states numerous times, is being done to clear his name— Dorner states explicitly, “The attacks will stop when the department states the truth about my innocence, PUBLICLY!!!”. These beliefs held by Dorner, alongside his racialized critique of the populace he separates himself from, further articulates what Crutch calls an “absence of confidence in the strength of the masses of the people” Thus, although being released forty-five years before Dorner’s resistance and death, his ideology and ill-informed resistance are precisely what Crutch criticizes. Crutch does not stop at criticism in his editorial for The Black Panther, he proceeds to offer solutions:
“The methods of correction are as follows.
Raise the political level in the party by means of education. At the same time, eliminate the remnants of opportunism and putschism and break-down selfish departmentalism.
Intensify the political training of officers and men. Select workers and people experienced in struggle to join the party; thus, organizationally weakening or even eradicating the purely military viewpoint.
The party must actively attend to and discuss military work.
Draw up party rules and regulations which clearly define its tasks, the relationship between its military and its political apparatus, and the relationship between the party and the masses of the people.” (23)
These solutions, beginning with raising the political education of party members, an insistence on political training and its relation to militant action, and the enforcement of these practices via party rules are important in leading to an understanding of why Dorner’s story is critical to both narratives of resistance, and resistance in praxis. It is clear that Crutch is not disavowing the Black Liberation Army, but is rather being critical of them because their praxis, void of ideology, makes them less dependable, and thus harder to be in solidarity with.
PART TWO
Crutch’s critique provides a roadmap for people who both believe in and practice resistance against state violence, and also illustrate the importance of critical solidarity. By being critical and honest about Dorner’s low political education, his mercenary mentality, and his lack of faith in the rest of society, we are made aware of the necessity for political education and a network of support for radicals, disillusioned by the prestige of the United States empire.
Myth
“The very imposition of a normative force upon a state of affairs, real or imagined, is the act of creating narrative “
—Robert M. Cover,
In killing Dorner, the LAPD was able to end the narrative and stop his resistance by denying his right to go to court. If Dorner had been tried in a court of law, courts would, hypothetically, publicly validate the abuses Dorner called out in his manifesto— or they would be seen as unsubstantiated and unworthy of attention because Dorner himself would be on trial, not the reason for his action; a tricky reality of the verisimilitude of the court of law. The ethical man— broken by racism and corruption he witnessed firsthand in a system he had faith in —was again betrayed and silenced by a state sanctioned execution that parallels the American tradition of a lynching. His death, and his body set aflame in the city of Big Bear is representative of what the violent arm of the state is capable of doing to its adversaries; not police brutality, but a state sanctioned murder— police simply doing their job. Dorner, who shed blood because he was broken, is representative of an individual has been sold a lie and grew to hate his role within it.
In a New York Times article written after Dorner’s death, a liberal op-ed columnist Charles M. Blow wrote a piece titled “Don’t Mythologize Christopher Dorner,” in which he expresses disgust at those who make a hero of Dorner, and apologize or empathize with his action. He states, “fighting for justice is noble. Spilling innocent blood is the ultimate act of cowardice. Dorner is not the right emblem for those wronged by the system,” (Blow 1) but as someone who was wronged by the system, and as his resistance was informed by the ideology of that system, how is he not its emblem?
When Blow cites KTLA’s condolences to “anyone that suffered losses or injuries resulting from Christopher’s actions,” he acknowledges it as “the right sentiment: condolences for the victims and condemnation of Dorner’s actions. Period” (1). The narratives of both Blow and KTLA omit:
1. the two women who were misidentified as Dorner while delivering newspapers who were shot at over one hundred times (Goldstein 1), and
2. the man who, twenty five minutes later, was shot at after his truck was, again misidentified, and rammed by the same department.
Through both revisions, these acts of violence that are a direct result of police negligence and thirst for blood are framed as being a result of Dorner’s actions— not the police or their abuse. The passive voice in Blow’s critique is astounding— the narrative propagated by his omissions are unsurprising. In addition, Dorner’s entrapment and the burning of his corpse is both synthesized and editorialized in the sentence: “Christopher Dorner… who died this week in a cabin fire while on the run” (Blow 1), the section omitted by ellipses is used to call Dorner a fugitive and state his crimes. Blow’s intent is clear— to villanize Dorner and condemn anyone who sees him as representative of resistance and a possibility for accountability and change.
I argue the opposite of Blow’s op-ed— Dorner needs to be mythologized, not only to praise a man broken by a corrupt system, but to let the arm of the state know that we, as victims of their violence and members of the communities they occupy, will support and stand for anyone who is against them. As a corrupt occupying force that exists to protect property and reject accountability, resistance in its many forms should be praised to send a message. A message that states a corrupt, violent organization is deserving of whatever bloodshed comes as a result of their abuse.
In mythologizing Dorner, not only are the police made aware of their unrespected role of power, they are also aware that the public they occupy is against them. By praising revolutionaries, and even an admittedly shortsighted radical like Christopher Dorner, we create a network of support that uplifts resistors. We are aware that violence and the threat of violence brings change. Dorner himself stated that he was waging a war against the police because of their corruption, and what they did to him for calling it out. Critiques of Dorner as an egoist fall short of acknowledging the national context of early 2013— this was before the Black Lives Matter movement, and there were no major organizations to absorb his radical resistance. Instead, because there was no support network of resistance for Dorner, he was compelled to act alone in order to begin the violent change we need to combat a violently corrupt police force. Thus, through a framework of critical solidarity, people who believe in resistance and revolution can set the social and ideological base of escape for possible revolutionaries like Christopher Dorner by allowing Dorner to be a myth, identifying how his ideology impeded his resistance, and using the narrative of his resistance to educate and liberate people trapped in the illusion of American empire.
Blankstein, Andrew, et al. “Women Shot during Dorner Manhunt to Receive $4.2 Million from L.A.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 23 Apr. 2013, www.latimes.com/local/la-xpm-2013-apr-23-la-me-dorner-settlement-20130424-story.html.
Blow, Charles M. “Don't Mythologize Christopher Dorner.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 16 Feb. 2013, www.nytimes.com/2013/02/16/opinion/blow-dont-mythologize-christopher-dorner.html?_r=0.
Cover, Robert M., "The Supreme Court, 1982 Term -- Foreword: Nomos and Narrative" (1983). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 2705. http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/2705
Crutch, Capt. “Correcting Mistaken Ideas.” The Black Panthers Speak, edited by Philip S. Foner, 2017, pp 21-23. Print
Dorner, Christopher. Manifesto. 7 Feb. 2013. Pdf
Goldstein, Sasha. “LAPD Officers Who Shot Innocent Women during Manhunt for Vengeful Ex-Cop Violated Policy: Report .” Nydailynews.com, New York Daily News, 10 Jan. 2019, www.nydailynews.com/news/national/lapd-cops-shot-women-violated-policy-article-1.1602272.
Research And Destroy New York City. Communiqué From An Ex-Cop. 2013. Annotation of Christopher Dorner’s manifesto. https://researchdestroy.com/dorner-communique-from-an-ex-cop.pdf
Rodríguez, Dylan. “Beyond “Police Brutality”: Racist State Violence and the University of California.” American Quarterly, vol. 64, no. 2, June 2012 pp. 301-313. JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23273518
