Car Prowler Pays a Deadly Price After Deciding to Start a Gunfight with Minnesota Police Officers – Perp’s Family Lashes Out

[volsrocks]

On May 4, the Hollis family and their legal representatives accused the police of a cover-up and demanded body camera footage, police vehicle videos, and 911 calls regarding the incident.

On May 4, the Hollis family and their legal representatives accused the police of a cover-up and demanded body camera footage, police vehicle videos, and 911 calls regarding the incident.

“To just say a weapon was brandished and gunfire was exchanged leaves a lot to question,” said Nikki Holiday, a legal liaison for Hollis’ family.

“A life was lost. Let’s get to the facts before we just put these narratives out there and start smearing the victim,” she added.

On Sunday, the family of Hollis announced they had hired a national civil rights law firm to shake down the City of Richfield and the Minnesota BCA. But they were in for a surprise just one day later.

Richfield police released bodycam footage on Monday of the entire Desaver Hollis incident. It confirms the story the cops were telling all along.

Car Prowler Pays a Deadly Price After Deciding to Start a Gunfight with Minnesota Police Officers – Perp’s Family Lashes Out After Police Release Bodycam Footage (VIDEO) * The Gateway Pundit * by Cullen Linebarger

The family of a hardened criminal killed by police in Richfield, Minnesota, lashed out at police after bodycam footage showed exactly what happened.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

These IDIOTS always claim didn du nuffin

 

[archives]

Always comical, with everything going on today, Iran, inflation, Trump, this one ^ always takes time to find some local crime story involving a black person and throws it out there as newsworthy.

 

[Grim Reaper]

View attachment 83491


On May 4, the Hollis family and their legal representatives accused the police of a cover-up and demanded body camera footage, police vehicle videos, and 911 calls regarding the incident.

On May 4, the Hollis family and their legal representatives accused the police of a cover-up and demanded body camera footage, police vehicle videos, and 911 calls regarding the incident.

“To just say a weapon was brandished and gunfire was exchanged leaves a lot to question,” said Nikki Holiday, a legal liaison for Hollis’ family.

“A life was lost. Let’s get to the facts before we just put these narratives out there and start smearing the victim,” she added.

On Sunday, the family of Hollis announced they had hired a national civil rights law firm to shake down the City of Richfield and the Minnesota BCA. But they were in for a surprise just one day later.

Richfield police released bodycam footage on Monday of the entire Desaver Hollis incident. It confirms the story the cops were telling all along.

Car Prowler Pays a Deadly Price After Deciding to Start a Gunfight with Minnesota Police Officers – Perp’s Family Lashes Out After Police Release Bodycam Footage (VIDEO) * The Gateway Pundit * by Cullen Linebarger

The family of a hardened criminal killed by police in Richfield, Minnesota, lashed out at police after bodycam footage showed exactly what happened.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

These IDIOTS always claim didn du nuffin

What is factually confirmed?​

1. Police responded to a car‑prowler / theft‑from‑vehicle call​

Multiple outlets confirm officers were responding to a reported vehicle theft around 3:30 a.m. in Richfield, MN.

2. Officers encountered Hollis nearby and he fled on foot​

Hollis matched the suspect description and ran when officers attempted to stop him.

3. Bodycam footage shows Hollis produced a handgun and shot Sgt. Mario Leon in the hand​

This is confirmed by FOX 9, CBS Minnesota, MPR News, and the Minnesota BCA’s preliminary account.

• FOX 9: Hollis “pulled a gun” and exchanged gunfire.
• CBS: Hollis “raised a handgun and shot Leon… hitting the officer’s hand.”
• MPR News: Footage shows Hollis shooting the officer in the hand.

4. Officers returned fire and killed Hollis​

All mainstream outlets confirm this.

5. The family demanded full transparency before footage was released​

This is accurate. The family and their legal liaison Nikki Holiday publicly questioned the police narrative and requested all footage and 911 calls.

What is not factual or is biased in the Gateway Pundit post?​

1. “Hardened criminal” — unsupported​

No mainstream source describes Hollis this way. It is editorial rhetoric, not a verified fact.

2. “Perp’s family lashes out” — misleading framing​

The family asked for transparency, which is standard in police shootings. They did not “lash out” in the sense implied; they held a press conference and requested evidence.

3. “Decided to start a gunfight” — partially true but oversimplified​

Bodycam footage does show Hollis firing first, but the Gateway Pundit frames it as intentional aggression rather than a chaotic struggle during an arrest.Mainstream reporting describes:

• A chase
• A physical struggle
• Hollis firing from the ground

4. “Cover‑up” accusation — missing context​

The family questioned the narrative before seeing the footage. This is normal in police‑involved shootings and does not imply wrongdoing.

5. Racialized mockery (“didn du nuffin”) — not factual​

This is simply a racist comment inserted by the forum poster, not a factual claim.

Bias Assessment​

Gateway Pundit Bias:​

• Strong right‑wing editorial framing
• Loaded language (“hardened criminal,” “shake down,” “idiots”)
• Presents police narrative as unquestionably correct
• Frames family skepticism as malicious rather than routine

Mainstream Sources:​

• Confirm the key facts: Hollis shot an officer; officers returned fire; Hollis died
• Provide procedural detail (BCA investigation, officer names, timeline)
• Include the family’s concerns without endorsing them
• Avoid inflammatory language

Bottom Line​

Factually supported:

• Hollis shot an officer first.
• Officers returned fire and killed him.
• Bodycam footage confirms this sequence.
• The family requested transparency before footage release.

Not supported / biased:

• Claims that the family is “shaking down” the city
• Describing Hollis as a “hardened criminal”
• Mocking language about “didn du nuffin”
• Implying the family lied after seeing the footage (they questioned it before seeing it)

 

[Taichiliberal]

What is factually confirmed?​

1. Police responded to a car‑prowler / theft‑from‑vehicle call​

Multiple outlets confirm officers were responding to a reported vehicle theft around 3:30 a.m. in Richfield, MN.

2. Officers encountered Hollis nearby and he fled on foot​

Hollis matched the suspect description and ran when officers attempted to stop him.

3. Bodycam footage shows Hollis produced a handgun and shot Sgt. Mario Leon in the hand​

This is confirmed by FOX 9, CBS Minnesota, MPR News, and the Minnesota BCA’s preliminary account.

• FOX 9: Hollis “pulled a gun” and exchanged gunfire.
• CBS: Hollis “raised a handgun and shot Leon… hitting the officer’s hand.”
• MPR News: Footage shows Hollis shooting the officer in the hand.

4. Officers returned fire and killed Hollis​

All mainstream outlets confirm this.

5. The family demanded full transparency before footage was released​

This is accurate. The family and their legal liaison Nikki Holiday publicly questioned the police narrative and requested all footage and 911 calls.

What is not factual or is biased in the Gateway Pundit post?​

1. “Hardened criminal” — unsupported​

No mainstream source describes Hollis this way. It is editorial rhetoric, not a verified fact.

2. “Perp’s family lashes out” — misleading framing​

The family asked for transparency, which is standard in police shootings. They did not “lash out” in the sense implied; they held a press conference and requested evidence.

3. “Decided to start a gunfight” — partially true but oversimplified​

Bodycam footage does show Hollis firing first, but the Gateway Pundit frames it as intentional aggression rather than a chaotic struggle during an arrest.Mainstream reporting describes:

• A chase
• A physical struggle
• Hollis firing from the ground

4. “Cover‑up” accusation — missing context​

The family questioned the narrative before seeing the footage. This is normal in police‑involved shootings and does not imply wrongdoing.

5. Racialized mockery (“didn du nuffin”) — not factual​

This is simply a racist comment inserted by the forum poster, not a factual claim.

Bias Assessment​

Gateway Pundit Bias:​

• Strong right‑wing editorial framing
• Loaded language (“hardened criminal,” “shake down,” “idiots”)
• Presents police narrative as unquestionably correct
• Frames family skepticism as malicious rather than routine

Mainstream Sources:​

• Confirm the key facts: Hollis shot an officer; officers returned fire; Hollis died
• Provide procedural detail (BCA investigation, officer names, timeline)
• Include the family’s concerns without endorsing them
• Avoid inflammatory language

Bottom Line​

Factually supported:

• Hollis shot an officer first.
• Officers returned fire and killed him.
• Bodycam footage confirms this sequence.
• The family requested transparency before footage release.

Not supported / biased:

• Claims that the family is “shaking down” the city
• Describing Hollis as a “hardened criminal”
• Mocking language about “didn du nuffin”
• Implying the family lied after seeing the footage (they questioned it before seeing it)

That's all the pointy hooded palooka is good for. That's what happens when you see the world through those little hood eyelets.

 

[volsrocks]

Always comical, with everything going on today, Iran, inflation, Trump, this one ^ always takes time to find some local crime story involving a black person and throws it out there as newsworthy.

So if he didn't have the gun it would have been newsworthy and a reason to start riots

 

[volsrocks]

Always comical, with everything going on today, Iran, inflation, Trump, this one ^ always takes time to find some local crime story involving a black person and throws it out there as newsworthy.

Only newsworthy nationwide if it shows the cop to be bad so it can be on CNN primetime etc and people can scream racist

If it shows the cop was in the right, naw cant show that

 

[Lionfish]

Always comical, with everything going on today, Iran, inflation, Trump, this one ^ always takes time to find some local crime story involving a black person and throws it out there as newsworthy.

Poor anchovies,
Were you ever one of those alt lefties who demanded the cops have body cams? I remember the screeching and now bitching that it has been a benefit for the cops.

As for the perp in this incident?

thoughts and prayers.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Our pointy hood wearing palooka spends a LOT of time reporting ONLY on crimes committed by black folk. His eyelets block out the Jan. 6th attempted insurrection, the Trump pardons and the subsequent crimes.

 

[archives]

Only newsworthy nationwide if it shows the cop to be bad so it can be on CNN primetime etc and people can scream racist

If it shows the cop was in the right, naw cant show that

Oh, I guess you mean like the MAGA militia beating on Capitol police January 6th

Imagine all the fun you could have had if the MAGA militia was instead Black Americans storming the Capitol, you would have threads for the decade without scrolling the Internet

 

[archives]

Poor anchovies,
Were you ever one of those alt lefties who demanded the cops have body cams? I remember the screeching and now bitching that it has been a benefit for the cops.

As for the perp in this incident?

thoughts and prayers.

Ah, no, didn’t really have a position either way

 

[Taichiliberal]

Oh, I guess you mean like the MAGA militia beating on Capitol police January 6th

Imagine all the fun you could have had if the MAGA militia was instead Black Americans storming the Capitol, you would have threads for the decade without scrolling the Internet

 

[Teflon Don]

Looks like Marxists are regretting their body cam demands from years ago

Instead of capturing what is nonexistent police brutality we capture a whole culture chimping out like savages,

 

[Taichiliberal]

Looks like Marxists are regretting their body cam demands from years ago

Instead of capturing what is nonexistent police brutality we capture a whole culture chimping out like savages,

You're babbling again, gumby. Only the grinning clown you see in the mirror and the sheet wearing crowd nods in approval of you opinion only diatribe. But your stupidity got you attention, so you're satisfied
Carry on.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Poor anchovies,
Were you ever one of those alt lefties who demanded the cops have body cams? I remember the screeching and now bitching that it has been a benefit for the cops.

As for the perp in this incident?

thoughts and prayers.

I'm sorry, but where do you read that anyone is against body cam footage, much lesstrying to exonerate the perpetrator?

 

[Lionfish]

I'm sorry, but where do you read that anyone is against body cam footage, much lesstrying to exonerate the perpetrator?

Everybody is for it until it blows up their lawsuit. Ask the people who were trying to make a case against the Richfield police.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Looks like Marxists are regretting their body cam demands from years ago

Instead of capturing what is nonexistent police brutality we capture a whole culture chimping out like savages,

we need body cam.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Everybody is for it until it blows up their lawsuit. Ask the people who were trying to make a case against the Richfield police.

So you have NO source other than your personal opinion, supposition & conjecture. Got it.

 

[Teflon Don]

we need body cam.

I love the body cams. It confirms what we have always known when it comes to police interactions.

Don't start none, won't be none and FAFO

Marxists have operated under this delusion that innocent black folk like Trayvon Martin are just strolling down the street with advanced physics books under their arms heading to early college classes.

But, the reality is that they are thugs that are quite often committing violent crimes and more often than not giving the police ample reason to do what it takes to subdue them

What makes it all so ironic is that it was the marxists and race hustlers that DEMANDED body cams. Now they are reversing course because it isn't showing the narrative they wanted.

I say fuck em

 

[Grim Reaper]

I love the body cams. It confirms what we have always known when it comes to police interactions.

Don't start none, won't be none and FAFO

Marxists have operated under this delusion that innocent black folk like Trayvon Martin are just strolling down the street with advanced physics books under their arms heading to early college classes.

But, the reality is that they are thugs that are quite often committing violent crimes and more often than not giving the police ample reason to do what it takes to subdue them

What makes it all so ironic is that it was the marxists and race hustlers that DEMANDED body cams. Now they are reversing course because it isn't showing the narrative they wanted.

I say fuck em

FACT CHECK​

1. “Body cams confirm what we’ve always known.”​

Partially true, partially false. Body‑worn camera research shows mixed outcomes, not a single universal pattern.
What studies actually show:

• Some body‑cam programs reduce complaints and use‑of‑force incidents.
  • Example: A 2022 meta‑analysis found a 17% reduction in complaints and 10% reduction in use of force in some jurisdictions.
• Other studies show no statistically significant change.
  • The largest randomized trial (Washington, D.C.) found no measurable effect on officer behavior or civilian complaints.

Source examples:

• National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
• Police Quarterly (peer‑reviewed)
• D.C. Office of the City Administrator study

Conclusion: Body cams increase transparency, but they do not consistently validate any single political narrative.

2. Trayvon Martin claim​

The statement that Trayvon Martin was a “thug” or committing crimes is not supported by evidence.
Verified facts:

• Trayvon Martin was unarmed.
• He was not committing a crime at the time of the encounter.
• The Department of Justice found no evidence of wrongdoing by Martin that justified deadly force.
• The DOJ also found insufficient evidence to charge George Zimmerman with federal civil‑rights violations.

Sources:

• U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (2015 report)
• Sanford Police Department case files

Conclusion: The claim is not factual.

3. “Most black people in police encounters are thugs committing violent crimes.”​

This is not supported by any credible data and relies on racial generalization, not evidence.
What the data actually shows:

• Most police encounters with Black Americans are for non‑violent reasons (traffic stops, calls for service, minor infractions).
• The majority of Black Americans are not involved in violent crime.
• Crime statistics do not justify racial generalizations about any group.

Sources:

• Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
• FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)
• National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)

Conclusion: The claim is factually incorrect and overgeneralizes a protected group, which is not supported by evidence.

4. “Marxists demanded body cams and now hate them.”​

This is a political opinion, not a factual statement.
Facts:

• Body‑cam adoption was supported by civil‑rights groups, police‑reform advocates, many conservatives, and many police departments.
• There is no unified political group that has reversed its stance.
• Criticism of body‑cam footage often depends on specific incidents, not ideology.

Sources:

• ACLU statements (2013–2023)
• Police Executive Research Forum (PERF)
• Bipartisan legislative records on body‑cam funding

Conclusion: This is rhetorical framing, not a verifiable claim.

BIAS CHECK​

The original statement contains:

• Racial generalizations about Black Americans
• Political labeling (“Marxists,” “race hustlers”)
• Assumptions about criminality tied to race
• Claims presented as universal truths without evidence
• Emotionally charged language designed to provoke, not inform

These are indicators of ideological bias, not factual analysis.

OVERALL RATING​

Claim	Status	Notes
Body cams “prove what we always knew”	Mixed	Research shows varied outcomes
Trayvon Martin was a “thug” committing crimes	False	No evidence supports this
“Most Black people in police encounters are violent criminals”	False	Not supported by any data
“Marxists demanded body cams then reversed course”	Opinion	Not a factual claim

 

[Jerry Mathers]

FACT CHECK​

1. “Body cams confirm what we’ve always known.”​

Partially true, partially false. Body‑worn camera research shows mixed outcomes, not a single universal pattern.
What studies actually show:

• Some body‑cam programs reduce complaints and use‑of‑force incidents.
  • Example: A 2022 meta‑analysis found a 17% reduction in complaints and 10% reduction in use of force in some jurisdictions.
• Other studies show no statistically significant change.
  • The largest randomized trial (Washington, D.C.) found no measurable effect on officer behavior or civilian complaints.

Source examples:

• National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
• Police Quarterly (peer‑reviewed)
• D.C. Office of the City Administrator study

Conclusion: Body cams increase transparency, but they do not consistently validate any single political narrative.

2. Trayvon Martin claim​

The statement that Trayvon Martin was a “thug” or committing crimes is not supported by evidence.
Verified facts:

• Trayvon Martin was unarmed.
• He was not committing a crime at the time of the encounter.
• The Department of Justice found no evidence of wrongdoing by Martin that justified deadly force.
• The DOJ also found insufficient evidence to charge George Zimmerman with federal civil‑rights violations.

Sources:

• U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (2015 report)
• Sanford Police Department case files

Conclusion: The claim is not factual.

3. “Most black people in police encounters are thugs committing violent crimes.”​

This is not supported by any credible data and relies on racial generalization, not evidence.
What the data actually shows:

• Most police encounters with Black Americans are for non‑violent reasons (traffic stops, calls for service, minor infractions).
• The majority of Black Americans are not involved in violent crime.
• Crime statistics do not justify racial generalizations about any group.

Sources:

• Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
• FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR)
• National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)

Conclusion: The claim is factually incorrect and overgeneralizes a protected group, which is not supported by evidence.

4. “Marxists demanded body cams and now hate them.”​

This is a political opinion, not a factual statement.
Facts:

• Body‑cam adoption was supported by civil‑rights groups, police‑reform advocates, many conservatives, and many police departments.
• There is no unified political group that has reversed its stance.
• Criticism of body‑cam footage often depends on specific incidents, not ideology.

Sources:

• ACLU statements (2013–2023)
• Police Executive Research Forum (PERF)
• Bipartisan legislative records on body‑cam funding

Conclusion: This is rhetorical framing, not a verifiable claim.

BIAS CHECK​

The original statement contains:

• Racial generalizations about Black Americans
• Political labeling (“Marxists,” “race hustlers”)
• Assumptions about criminality tied to race
• Claims presented as universal truths without evidence
• Emotionally charged language designed to provoke, not inform

These are indicators of ideological bias, not factual analysis.

OVERALL RATING​

Claim	Status	Notes
Body cams “prove what we always knew”	Mixed	Research shows varied outcomes
Trayvon Martin was a “thug” committing crimes	False	No evidence supports this
“Most Black people in police encounters are violent criminals”	False	Not supported by any data
“Marxists demanded body cams then reversed course”	Opinion	Not a factual claim

we need body cams.

for accountability purposes.