Harris County, TX — An innocent mother’s assault by a police officer highlights the risk people take when calling 911 for help. Angela Lopez needed the police for help but when they showed up, help was the last thing she got.

The Free Thought Project spoke with Mrs. Lopez, who wants her story told so that others do not share her brutal fate.

On August 16, 2014, Lopez had an altercation with her daughter. So, she called the cops to help her resolve this situation.

“I was involved in a physical incident with my oldest daughter that turned out bad. I was really upset because she had hit me and bit me in the knee. I wanted her and ex-boyfriend out of my home. After they refused to leave, I called 911 to get someone to come out to help me remove or escort them out of my house,” Lopez explained.

However, when police arrived, officer Francisco Salazar became instantly belligerent.


As Lopez explains, “He entered into my front door which was open. The first thing I told him was if he could please talk to my daughter because she wouldn’t listen to me. His first reply was ‘Shut up and give me your ID!’ So I turned to my other daughter in the hallway and asked her to get my purse in my room. Then the officer took a step towards me, got in my face and raised his voice loudly, and told me, ‘Did I tell her to give it to me? No! I told you to give it to me!'”

READ MORE:  Education in a Police State -- At Least Four Children Tased By Cops in School in Only a Few Weeks

“Look, officer, you don’t have to yell at me. I’m not disrespecting you in any way,” Lopez told Salazar.

But this seemingly made the officer even more aggressive.

“Well, you don’t listen!” He pointed out his finger toward Lopez, saying, “Now step outside and let me talk to your daughter!”

Lopez tells the Free Thought Project that she realized that calling the police may have been a bad idea after this cop began to escalate the situation.

“At that point, I had a bad feeling this would not go good and that I could not trust him to help me resolve this, not with his aggressive attitude. I was upset, shocked and confused about why he was treating me that way, especially when I was the one who called the police for help,” Lopez said. “So at that point, after he told me that, I told him, ‘You no what, if you want to talk to my daughter, you and her can step out and you can talk to her out there. This is my house.'”

Having been told what to do set this officer off. He then demanded her ID once more and when she asked why, he attacked.

In the video, we see Salazar yank Lopez out of her house and slam her down in the front yard.

“He grabbed me by my wrist twisted my arm slightly and yanked me out of my house. When I was on the ground he kept telling me to give him my arm, knowing darn well, I couldn’t because my arm was trapped under my body and he was on top of me. He even bent my arm all the way in half, behind my back applying his pressure against it, hurting my shoulder really bad,” she said.

READ MORE:  Woman Jailed for 4 Months for Building an Addition for Her Sick Mom in Her Own Backyard

Salazar’s attack and subsequent ‘stop resisting’ remarks are typical in police takedowns. Salazar demanded Lopez give him her arms, while at the same time making it entirely impossible.

After brutalizing her in front of her children, Salazar then put Lopez in handcuffs and shoved her in the back of his cruiser — with the car turned off.

It was a hot day and Lopez recalls sitting in the back of the cruiser for a half an hour sweating before having an asthma attack.

“I could not breathe because he had all his windows rolled up, and it was very hot that day,” Lopez recalls. “I threw up 5 times because I was feeling so sick cuz I couldn’t breathe. I was left there alone without my asthma meds. About 30 minutes later, he took me to jail and told me he was charging me with Failure to ID.”

After sitting in the jail all day, Lopez was let go with no charges. She’d been assaulted, kidnapped, and caged, for doing nothing wrong.

Naturally, Salazar was never held accountable for the attack and in October, Lopez filed a lawsuit. Lopez is now permanently injured from torn ligaments in her shoulder. All for calling the police.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Facebook.
  • The Cat’s Vagina

    Well, FUCK! Stories like this really make it hard for me to be proud of living in Texas. Fuck this guy – I hope karma brings him all the misery he deserves!

  • Amor Terra

    How many of these stories do we need to see before we conclude that these mental midgets do more harm than good and should be put out to pasture?

    • billdeserthills

      America’s largest gang

  • 2.7182818284590

    No surprise here. Next.

  • LawrenceNeal

    She’s lucky he didn’t kill her. Call the SA murder squad, someone dies.

  • Robert Kanoti


  • Mary Bush

    Same thing

  • Robin W. Tong

    Anyone familiar with the ID laws in Texas knows that NO ONE is under any obligation to ID themselves unless they have been lawfully placed under arrest. Arresting anyone for the ‘offense’ of failure to ID is a malicious and false arrest.

    The backup officer can also be heard quipping the bullshit about failure to ID, and ordering the family not to interfere. He should also be named in the lawsuit for the deprivation of this woman’s civil rights under the color of law,and for failing to intervene to stop the assault and false arrest of this woman.

    This violence was maliciously incited by these officers under the color of law. What would have happened if this woman had attempted to defend herself or her family had attempted to defend her from this malicious violence and false arrest perpetrated under the color of law?

    Police are being taught and trained to play some very dangerous fucking games placing their lives and safety and the lives, safety, and civil liberties of people in jeopardy.

    Courts keep expanding the privileged immunity of officers engaging in the most egregious injustices that harm and even murder innocent people, and departments keep expanding the rulings of how such egregious injustices were in compliance with their policy and procedures.

    Matt Agorist and the TheFreeThoughtProject are definately doing the right thing advocating for civil rights and criminal justice reform. It is the only long term solution, as the courts and the legislatures have repeatedly failed for decades to redress these grievances on their own. I hope this woman wins her lawsuit.

    • Charles Batchelor

      I for one want to hear the audio and not just some poor quality video before i say anything. These things seem to turn out much different than thry are presented.

      • Dan Quixoté

        I don’t believe you. Since you used the plural “these things”, you’d have to show at least two such cases to be believable.

  • jonn

    Should be legal to shoot uniformed chimps on/in your property without a legal warrant.

    • EliWebber

      It is ,if they are the wrong doers ruled on by the Supreme court

      • palvadore

        Case please. Tks

        • Dan Quixoté

          That’s easy. The premier case is John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529. But to be thorough…

          See also 40 Am Jur.2d, Homicide, Sec. 140, p. 420.
          “At common law, if a party resisted arrest by an officer without warrant, and who had no right to arrest him, and if in the course of that resistence the officer was killed, the offense of the party resisting arrest would be reduced from what would have been murder, if the officer had the right to arrest, to manslaughter. What would be murder, if the officer had the right to arrest, might be reduced to manslaughter by the very fact that he had no such right. So an officer, at common law, was not authorized to make an arrest without a warrant, for a mere misdemeanor not committed in his presence. 1 Arch. Crim. Pr. & P. 7th Am. Ed. 103, note (1); also page 861 and following pages; 2 Hawk. P.C. 129, sec. 8; 3 Russell on Crimes, 6th ed. 83, 84, 97; 1 Chitty’s Crim. L. star page 15; 1 East P.C. c. 5, page 328; Derecourt v. Corbishley, 5 E. & B. 188; Fox v. Gaunt, 3 B. & Ad. 798; Reg. v. Chapman, 12 Cox’s Crim. Cas. 4; Rafferty v. The People, 69 Ill. 111; S.C. on a subsequent writ, 72 Ill. 37.” JOHN BAD ELK v. UNITED STATES, 177 U.S. 529, 44 L.Ed. 874, 20 S.Ct. 729 (April 30, 1900). See also State v. Valentine, 132 Wn.2d 1, 935 P.2d 1294 (May 1, 1997); The Queen v. Tooley, 92 Eng. Rep. 349, 351-352 (K.B. 1710); State v. Burt, 94 Wn.2d 108, 110, 614 P.2d 654 (1980) and WPIC 16.02.
          “It is the law that a person illegally arrested by an officer may resist that arrest, even to the extent of the taking of his life if his own life or any great bodily harm is threatened. John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529, 44 L.Ed. 874, 20 S.Ct. 729; State v. Gum, 68 W.Va. 105, 69 S.E. 463, 33 L.B.A. (N.S.) 150. . . . There is authority to the effect that, even in the case of an unlawful arrest, the person arrested would be warranted in using force and inflicting personal injury upon the officer only in self defense, the necessity or apparent necessity for which must appear. State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 361, 25 N.W. 793. . . . A similar rule was stated in a recent case, State v. Robinson, (1950), 72 A. (2d) (Me.) 260, where it was said: “An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right, and only the same right, to use force in defending himself as he would have in repelling any other assault and battery.” Had the appellant merely attempted to escape from the officer by flight, there would be no question but that the second arrest was as illegal as the first. [2] “Every man, however guilty, has a right to shun an illegal arrest by flight. The exercise of this right should not, and would not, subject him to be arrested as a fugitive.” Thomas v. State, 91 Ga. 204, 206, 18 S.E. 305; cited with approval in Porter v. State, 124 Ga. 297, 52 S.E. 283.” . . . [3] The issue of whether unnecessary force has been used in resisting arrest usually arises in prosecutions for assaulting or killing arresting officers, and in such cases that issue is usually a question for the jury under all circumstances. Harris v. State, 21 Ga.App. 792, 95 S.E. 268; 4 Am. Jur. 64, Arrest, Section 92.” State v. Rosseau, 40 Wn.2d 92, 94, 95-96 (February 28, 1952); State v. Baker, 58 Wn.App. 222, 228, 792 P.2d 542 (1990). And;
          “The existence of probable cause for the arrest is crucial to the State’s case because, as defendant correctly contends, not only does a citizen have the right to resist an unlawful arrest so long as that resistance is reasonable in light of all the circumstances, . . . but if an officer’s actions are unlawful, a defendant cannot be convicted of third degree assault, which requires intent to prevent or resist lawful apprehension or detention, State v. Humphries, 21 Wn.App 405, 408, 586 P.2d 130 (1978).” STATE v. JOHNSON, 29 Wn. App. 307, 309, 628 P.2d 479 (April 22, 1981); “A citizen has the right to resist an unlawful arrest so long as that resistance is reasonable in light of all the circumstances.” KENNEWICK v. KELLER, 11 Wn. App. 777, 787, 525 P.2d 267 (August 7, 1974); “The law in the state of Washington has been that one may resist an unlawful arrest by an amount of force reasonable and in proportion to the injury the arrestee faces. State v. Rosseau, 40 Wn.2d 92, 241 P.2d 447 (1952); State v. Schultze, 51 Wn.2d 878, 322 P.2d 839 (1958); State v. Eckman, 9 Wn.App. 905, 515 P.2d 837 (1973). . . . The Miller rule is that an accused assailant, in asserting self-defense, is entitled to rely upon his reasonable understanding of the circumstances. Under that rule, if a person reasonably but mistakenly believes himself to be in genuine danger of serious bodily injury, he may defend against that injury by the use of reasonable force, even though he is no truly in such danger. Miller was followed in State v. Dunning, 8 Wn.App. 340, 506 P.2d 321 (1973) and in State v. Ladiges, 66 Wn.2d 273, 401 P.2d 977 (1965), neither of which involved an arrest situation.” State v. Westlund, 13 Wn.App. 460, 465, 466 (May 9, 1975).
          “A person illegally arrested by an officer may resist that arrest; the force used in resisting an unlawful arrest must be reasonable and proportioned to the injury attempted upon party sought to be arrested. STATE v. HUMPHRIES, 21 Wn. App. 405, 407, 408, 586 P.2d 130 (October 2, 1978); “Lawful apprehension or detention of necessity must be carried out by a law enforcement or peace officer as defined in RCW 9A.16.020.” State v. Williams, 29 Wn. App. 86, 91 (1981); “We recognize that the defendant had a right to defend himself against an unlawful arrest. State v. Counts, 99 Wn.2d 54, 659, P.2d 1087 (1983); . . . Whether he used reasonable force under the circumstances is, however, a question for the jury.” STATE v. HOFFMAN, 35 Wn. App. 13 17, 664 P.2d 1259 (November 18, 1983). And;
          “In Seattle v. Gordon, 54 Wn.2d 515, 342 P.2d 604 (1959), the court stated at page 520 (quoting 39 Am. Jur. 510): “. . . If an officer does not disclose his authority and the accused does not know he is an officer and is attempting to arrest him for an offense, he has a right to resist the arrest with whatever force is necessary.” See also Morton v. State, 190 Ga. 792, 10 S.E.2D 836, 840 (1940); 5 Am.Jur. 2d Arrest §§ 69-70 (1962); 6A C.J.S. Arrest § 48 (1975). “It is, ordinarily incumbent on an officer, seeking to make an arrest without a warrant, to inform the accused of his authority or official character. An officer must make a reasonable disclosure, adapted to the circumstances, of his character and purpose; but, as a general rule, the notice is sufficient when it is such as to inform a reasonable man of the authority and the purpose of the one making the arrest. 6A C.J.S. Arrest § 45.” State v. Brown, 36 Wn.App. 166, at 169-170 (October 24, 1983).
          The basic right of everyone to resist an unlawful arrest is recognized by all authorities. In 5 Am. Jur. 2d, p. 778, is stated:
          “Any unlawful interference with the fundamental right of personal liberty may be resisted. Accordingly, every person has a right to resist an unlawful arrest.”

          • Dan Quixoté

            But you don’t get any protection from any of that unless you or your attorney find a way to specifically read it into the record in court. You have to cite your own precedents yourself; both the court and the prosecution are necessarily adversarial, and of nature and practice omit all precedent unhelpful to their case against you.

          • DonRice

            This is good information, Dan, but I think it requires a little context

            Bad Elk took place in 1899 and went by strict common law. However, most states have devised ways around that ruling, such as the Uniform Arrest Act and the Model Penal Code:

            The common law right to resist an illegal arrest, as a species of self-defense,

            went into steep decline in the latter half of the twentieth century. The decline

            began in the 1950s and 1960s, with the drafting of the Uniform Arrest Act and

            the Model Penal Code.123

            Today, only thirteen states allow a person to resist an illegal arrest.124 The

            modern trend is to forbid resistance to an arrest, “which the arrestee knows is

            being made by a peace officer, even though the arrest is unlawful.”125 Even
            in those jurisdictions with a right to resist arrest, almost none of them allow
            resistance to a Terry-style stop-and-frisk,126 even though courts rely on “policy arguments used elsewhere to support abolition of the common law [right to resist

            arrest] itself.”127


            However, I haven’t found anything on whether these revisions in the common law have ever come before the Supreme Court. But then, I’m not an attorney. I’m just a fiction writer who knows how to do basic research.

          • Dan Quixoté

            Miller’s excellent analysis in his 40-page article you reference is consistent with other non-partisan analyses – in short, “SCOTUS talks a good game [wholesale] when it comes to resisting unlawful arrest, but in practice [retail] you’re all at the mercy of the locally entrenched authorities, the constrictive state and local laws, and political preference in your jurisdiction. You could get lucky with a jury, though.”

            As with most constitutional questions still remaining unsettled, something uniquely bad has to happen to someone, and both they and their case would have to survive until attaining certiorari with the Supremes. Miller correctly describes the giant hole in supreme #2A precedent – whether or not the well established right to resist unlawful arrest in English Common Law manifests as a fundamental Constitutional right in the US and its territories. Common-law and natural-law rights are abrogated by state and local legislatures with nary a second thought, but even the most tyrannical of lesser fiefdoms eventually yield to SCOTUS-articulated Constitutional rights.

            So @palvadore proceed with full knowledge and caution. Bathe anything iffy in prayer

          • palvadore

            I fought pro Pro se as plaintiff- 1498 at the federal court of claims for copyright infringement. It was a huge amount of fun and I won. Well…they settled. With the Feds, you know that means you won;-)

            The Justice Department’s image was tarnished in my mind when I learned they aren’t about “Justice” but protecting the interest of the government. You’d be shocked at how they destroyed evidence! But I fought those Wiley fox and caught them in a trap of their own deception. Just like the lowly government thugs I now have in my snare.

            But now I would like to fight a just cause and lack the mental vigor needed to creat a solid – unsailable outline and complaint. I’m plugging away but the villains will likely get away. This 1983 stuff is a whole new area of law. Damn complex!

          • palvadore

            Outstanding! Thank you!
            If you do any legal writing I’d be interested in discussing.

          • Dan Quixoté

            No problem. As many states do, your home state may have similar statutes. While more rare, your county, township, and municipality may have such as well. They would typically be found by looking up terms such as “self defense”, “unlawful arrest”, “color of law”, “stand your ground”, and “castle doctrine”. I find Castle doctrine to be the richest source of useful statue and precedents, but your mileage may vary.

            I can help folks with actual legal woes for free. The only legal work I ever do for lucre is corporate contracts and intellectual property proceedings, or expert witness investigation and testimony.

  • Domina Elle

    Another white privilege card expired.

  • Mike Knox

    Surprised they didn’t shot the dog as well.

  • Madmotorman™ ® The Mad Hatter

    Surprised they didn’t shoot the dog!!!

    • Ajax Smith

      I am glad they didn’t shoot the mum or the kids.
      If she tried to give them her ID they would have probably thought it was a gun.

  • Johnny Strife

    So many of these pig violence videos begin with a woman calling the cops because she can’t handle her kids. I generally hate cops, but I can understand how after responding to a few dozen domestic disturbance calls of this nature you’d start to despise people who are so weak and low-class that they can’t even handle their own business. I’m not making excuses, I’m just wondering if that’s a contributing factor.

    • Actualy, yiou ARE making excuses for this creep cop’s brutality. HOW should a woman resolve getting people OUT of HER OWN HOME (no matter WHO it is she wants out) if THEY REFUSE TO LEAVE? What are your suggestions on that? Hope you never need any help from the police

      • Charles Batchelor

        file the required eviction paperwork like everyone else is required to do first.

        • Dan Quixoté

          Yes, because that works so well in the moment.

  • Jonathan Wint

    They Need to go to jail and there Peacekeeper certificate removed!

  • John C Carleton

    When are the chickens going to stop calling the fox to come to the hen house?

  • Terance Healy

    kind of a stupid misuse of police.
    She may not have deserved the rough treatment. She clearly does not understand the purpose of the police.
    Calling the police on your kids will only make things worse.

  • Ibcamn

    only time cops feel like a man is when they beat women and children…cops are the new american terrorists

  • palvadore

    Municipal police departments have become criminal enterprises. Where the hell is the DOJ? RICO!

    It’s the officer’s chief and the city manager that should be in jail!

  • Robert Vandergrift

    Fix your page assholes. It disables my ad blocker and lags the shit out of my PC.

  • y. Iamu

    Russia used as a decoy for the Seth Rich murder.

  • OneGoodDeed

    Too bad this is from FOX (cough cough) news. Can’t believe a word they say, true or not!

    Like Robert Vandergrift said, fix your damn page. Riddled with lag from your ads, ads, ads and more ads.

    • Steve

      Except Wikileaks said months ago it wasn’t the Russians. I believe Wikileaks more than any other source.

      • Renee Molineux

        You’ve got to be kidding. He might have been involved but we don’t know who else he might have been connected to either. They do have proof of Russian ties and have had all along. This sounds like another conspiracy theory brewing. My understanding is the information wasn’t given directly from the Russian government but through intermediaries. To try and make less of their involvement doesn’t get it. Thank goodness I don’t belong to either of the parties and all the radicals from both parties who just sound off with no unequivocal facts other than opinion because they are too partisan. The word “may” is always looming. I want to see cold hard facts because if there aren’t any that can be shown other than innuendo, it isn’t viable. Anyone can take things and piece them together to point to something. Breitbart and others of this ilk do it all the time.

        • DonRice

          I don’t care who the leaks came from. What I care about is if the emails released are clean. If they’re doctored, as some Clinton supporters have claimed, it would be easy to prove by simply releasing the original emails. But they won’t do that. The only rational conclusion is that they know they were wrong and they don’t want everyone else to know about their corruption.

    • Dan Quixoté

      Which thing is from Fox? Can you be more specific?

    • permalink

      How do you think TFTP can pay to post this social justice warrior whining day after day if it’s not w/ ads, ads, and more ads.

      I use “No-Scripts”, it stopped 7 out of 16 entities from “loading” on the page.

      • OneGoodDeed

        Other sites list ads and sell advertisement space without crashing/lagging a system. My software detected 52 trackers on this site. Today is the first time this video would load.

        • permalink

          It doesn’t surprise me that there are additional “loadings” here.

          Thing is, this has just been a recent event, started to happen maybe a month ago w/ a page layout change.

          In closer examination my no scripts add-on stopped 7 of 19, w/ a total scripts running number of 65.

          And I would rather “read” the news than see some “unknown quantity” video. One story here even showed a video that had nothing at all to do w/ the current article, lost my trust w/ that one.

          At least I don’t have to use facebook to comment…

  • Dan Quixoté

    Never. Call. The. Cops. Or 911 for that matter, since Dispatch sends cops to medical and Fire calls, too, now.

    If there’s a fire, call the Fire Department. You should have the phone number written on the fridge door. If there’s a medical emergency, call your in-network ambulance service, whose number you have on the fridge door. If your houseguests are trouble and won’t leave, call the veterans on your street you’ve hopefully befriended and thanked for their service, whose number should be on the fridge door.

    We don’t call the cops in our unincorporated hamlet, we take care of ourselves and each other, even when the riff-raff start causing trouble. We know better.

  • bigmurr

    Of course they’re blocking the investigation. They all need to go down! Debbie Wasserman Schultz also.

  • mike

    DOJ and Congress needs to GIVE Transactional Immunity to Julian Assange let us see and expose, Who is really on First? This Russia garbage expoused by the Stooges in the Media and their complicity in a Criminal Cover-up needs to aired.
    This runs so Deep it is a cover-up like just like Whitewater scores of people were murdered! FBI Agents Confirm Belief that Bill Clinton on behalf of Hillary Clinton Struck a ‘secret’ deal with Loretta Lynch, oh duh, oh shock, no shit Sherlock! BUT WHAT THEY ARE NOT telling you is this!
    That means Comey in an accomplice to the deal as he consummated it and delivered on the deal as he was the BAG MAN ‘hit man’ delivery man, to make sure nothing went wrong; it was the deal that was agreed amongst them not to prosecute Hillary Clinton!
    This is how it when down: Lynch made the deal with publicly acting as Hillary’s agent. It was wittingly “handed off to Comey” to deliver the deal; so Loretta Lynch would not publicly order not to prosecute Bill’s wife! This was used as a cover for Lynch to comply with their agreement, the although she made the decision NOT to prosecute after the Clinton/ Lynch conspired on the fix and it became public, the conspirators, cleverly jointly and decided to make the decision to have Comey to deliver the planned ‘verdict’.
    DO YOU BELIEVE FOR ONE MOMENT that Comey unilaterally made the decision to tell Congress THAT NOT DOJ made the decision NOT prosecute Hillary? WTF! If he had said, I recommend that Hillary Clinton has 50 counts and the USA LYNCH is refusing to prosecute Hillary so I believe YOU congress need a special Prosecutor! That would make some sense BUT that is not what Happened! Comey did it just the way he did, so that way it would block the other Republicans and especially the globalist RINOs from convening a Grand Jury to investigate 18 USCA 793 as the investigating agency, FBI had already said, ‘gee she was just goofy and did not mean to do it!’ Then when he is called out about it, the S.O.B. she I am so honorable that I did not trust USA Lynch to make the same decision I just screwed American with! Then he claims he was a good guy for covering the ASSES of the DEEP for which he works! HOW DAMN DUMB are you ass holes in DC??? However, In so doing he became the main player in a federal conspiracy; violations at as follows: 18 USCA 371 to 18 USCA 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), Obstruction of Justice to 18 USCA 1962 this RICO, plain and simple; there are several predicate offenses by the Clintons, Loretta Lynch, Huma, and Comey. I said he was deep state he was protecting Clintons and admittedly Lynch while going after President Trump! This unbelievable that Comey is not charged and Congress are that damn stupid and they think we are that ignorant.

  • Renee Amber Hollister

    NOT In the LEAST

  • Renee Amber Hollister

    Debbie Wasserman’s Brother is the Assistant US Attorney in DC, where SETH RICH was Murdered and the investigators were told to stand down. Coincidence?