Bullet-Headed Hero Administers Steel Shampoo

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A lawsuit has been filed after video released earlier this year showed a handcuffed Texas man arrested for a DUI charge being shoved into a steel door at the Houston City Jail.

According to the lawsuit, Reuben Williams was booked in November 2014 prior to being led to a holding cell by officer S. Corral, when the cop slammed his head into the cell door. The impact caused a gash that began bleeding profusely.

Surveillance video from inside the jail shows Corral then shove Williams against the wall of the cell and apply a neck hold from behind until Williams collapses onto the floor jerking wildly. He is then seen writhing on the floor in his own blood, smearing it with his face. During the entire episode Williams was defenseless with his hands cuffed behind his back.

The video shows someone eventually come to the cell in order to render medical treatment to Williams. The injury required stitches and left him with a permanent scare above his right eye.

Corral reportedly maintained that he was merely reacting to Williams spitting on him. The surveillance video from inside the jail shows no evidence of that however – and Williams’ attorney is now calling for body camera footage to be released.

In addition, the attorney, Randall Kallinen, demanded that Corral receive disciplinary action at a press conference addressing the lawsuit last week. In August, a Harris County grand jury failed to charge the officer following a police investigation.

“Although the video is disturbing, the ultimate question for the grand jury was whether, after looking at all the evidence, the officer’s conduct rose to the level of a crime,” Harris County District Attorney’s Office spokespeople said at the time.

The lawsuit alleges Fourth and 14th Amendment violations, assault and battery, and maintains Williams sustained “great physical pain and discomfort and at least anxiety, unconsciousness, dizziness, fear, anxiety, memory loss and depression” as a result of the incident.

“There have been 250 shootings in a row by HPD and there is no evidence of one single disciplinary action taken, or one single time that there has been an indictment by a grand jury,” Kallinen said.

“Now, the current mayor got the support of HPD in his election very early. The mayor needs to show people these body cam videos. They need to release videos and they need to discipline their officers.”

Williams, who reportedly remains in jail for charges related to the incident, is seeking an undisclosed amount of monetary damages for excessive force, mental anguish, and attorney’s fees as part of the lawsuit.

Local news coverage containing raw footage:


  1. I’ve tried to reply to “Bob” a few times in the proper post, won’t go through. I’ll try here.


    Different people value auto safety differently. The video merely shows that one car is better at protecting the occupant than the other car. It does not show that the imposition of US safety standards in Mexico would result in a net increase in “safety”. Nor does it show that “safe” cars are the result of those standards. As has been stated, car “safety” had been increasing prior to the mandates. One company, Volvo, built its’ brand on “safety”, and many people responded by buying the cars. If people value “safety”, the market will respond by producing “safe” cars. For those who value simplicity, fuel economy, price, etc… more than they value safety, the market will also respond. You seem to believe that your values should take precedence over the values of others.

    If US standards were imposed in Mexico, it is possible that net “safety” would be reduced. Such new cars would likely be out of reach for many people, which would keep older, less “safe”, cars on the road for a longer period.

    You want to know what is in your food and believe that food safety regulations ensure this. That belief is false (i’ve never seen e-coli, salmonella or fecal matter listed as an ingredient). If you are concerned about food safety, you would be far better served by investigating the reputations of specific producers and vendors than relying on the dubious competence of regulators to create “best practices” and assess food safety.

    Finally, the primary purpose and effect of regulation is to serve the interests of the most powerful players in a given industry. These players routinely lobby for seemingly onerous regulations because they know that it will put smaller players at a competitive disadvantage and create barriers to entry that are hard to overcome. This has the effect of stifling innovation and protecting the established interests. In economics, the phenomenon is called regulatory capture.

    For example, Mattel lobbied for regulations that would be economically crippling to smaller players and one-off artisans; and then lobbied for, and received, an exemption to those same regulations.


    This type of transparently corrupt deal is not an aberration, it is the norm.


  2. Gritsforbreakfast identified this problem years ago. These incidents go to a grand jury. In Harris and many other counties the grand jury is simply ex-cops and prosecutors. Cops know they aren’t going to get charged no matter what the crime. It’s an inside joke for cops and prosecutors. Only the public is perplexed by cops never facing charges. This happens a great deal in Dallas and Ft. Worth too. Of course it happens a great deal all over the country. If there is a “civilian” on a jury, they get intimated quickly if they don’t go along immediately. Nice system eh?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here