discussion/thoughts

[gr8indoorsman]

Re: What are you talking about?

Originally posted by Beeazlebub:
"He was charged like four days after the shooting took place! Did the national media attention on the video accelerate it? Maybe."

I was proceeding from the (false) standpoint that the shooting occurred in 2013. It didn't, and you're correct on the timing.

My outrage stems from the excessive use of force used by police in this case and many other similar cases that happen almost every day.

Fair enough on the first part. The highlighted part is hyperbole. Not worth arguing over, but no, cops don't shoot people in the back almost every day. Words have meaning.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Re: read the news reports

Had the forensic evidence been presented yet? I don't know. I wasn't following until last night.

You guys should know by now that I don't subscribe to the "cops should be guilty until proven innocent" theory. Much like Muslims, there are some bad ones out there, but I don't let that taint my view of the whole.

 

[Beeazlebub]

Re: What are you talking about?

Similar Cases, all occurring within the last month or so:

Case one

Case two

Case three

How often do incidents like this occur without associated video?


This post was edited on 4/9 6:50 PM by Beeazlebub

 

[Beeazlebub]

Re: read the news reports

You guys should know by now that I don't subscribe to the "cops should be guilty until proven innocent" theory. Much like Muslims, there are some bad ones out there, but I don't let that taint my view of the whole.

Straw-man.

 

[qazplm]

Re: read the news reports

not just a strawman, a complete non-sequitur.

 

[Purdue97]

With all due respect I call bs on that

Regardless of race? Serious question then, when the minority officer in Utah shot the white kid in the back while he was walking away, why was it not covered? And why did qazpalm and others here have no comment or not care to discuss it?

That wAs the worst shooting/abuse of force of all the incidents. Kid was walking away, had headphones on that everyone saw, there was no prior contact with officers, walking not running, and just shot.

Hey obviously the cop in SC here is guilty. No question. But the regardless of race and coverage is not correct.

 

[atmafola]

Re: With all due respect I call bs on that

Originally posted by Purdue97:
Regardless of race? Serious question then, when the minority officer in Utah shot the white kid in the back while he was walking away, why was it not covered? And why did qazpalm and others here have no comment or not care to discuss it?

That wAs the worst shooting/abuse of force of all the incidents. Kid was walking away, had headphones on that everyone saw, there was no prior contact with officers, walking not running, and just shot.

Hey obviously the cop in SC here is guilty. No question. But the regardless of race and coverage is not correct.

Sir, that is not the worst by far. And your description of that video is a bit misleading. The Tamyra grant case, 12 year old case shot in Cleveland playground, was far worse. The Utah kid was was older than 18 and at least warned a couple times to show his hands and given more than a second to react. That notwithstanding, it was a horrible case. It was a really distressing video. I didn't even realize the kid was white until you mentioned it.

There are other shootings that do involve black victims that don't get national attention. I can point you out to a few if you want. Some videos get attention where others don't. For me the pertinent question isn't are these use of force legally justifiable but rather are they necessary? And should we be demanding more accountability and more judicious use of freams from police?

 

[TheCainer]

I'm not responding to any particular post below but wanted to address the topic of whether or not anything would have come of this without the video. IMO, no, nothing would have come of it, at least as far as the officer being charged. In fact, the case was trending towards all of the other incidents we have seen in the past couple of years, the statement of the policeman against the non-statement of the dead man. In fact, history would have favored the policeman given the records kept in the previous 5 years in South Carolina; 209 shootings, and all ruled justified.

If the video had not surfaced, that's where the story might have ended. In nearly all cases where an officer fires a weapon, that is the end of the story. A study by The State found "[p]olice in South Carolina have fired their weapons at 209 suspects in the past five years" but none were convicted. "We ruled all the shootings were justified - and we looked at dozens and dozens of them," one former prosecutor told The State.

On the condition that when a suspect is even shot in the back, there is a case where the policeman was not charged:



Statewide, in a particularly disputed case, Sumter police shot and killed Aaron Jacobs, 25, on Sept. 28, 2010. They said Jacobs, a carjacking suspect, had a gun in his waistband when he ran away on foot during a patdown.

An autopsy showed Jacobs was shot twice in the back of the head and twice in the back, according to published accounts. Authorities fought the release of the autopsy all the way to the S.C. Supreme Court, which later ruled autopsies no longer are public records.

Third Circuit Solicitor Ernest Finney III exonerated the officer, saying the evidence did not substantiate a criminal charge. Critics said the public was cut off from information critical to understanding exactly what happened.


IMO, there is just too much cover for the police by their counterparts who are supposed to keep an investigation such as this transparent. Thank goodness in this case, the video showed up, albeit the guy who shot it now says he fears for his well being. I wonder why that is?


Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article15654974.html#storylink=cpy

Link

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Re: read the news reports

What I meant was, I'm not as cynical about police as you and a lot of others are, just like you and I are not as cynical about Muslims as GMM and some other folks. Sorry for not phrasing that better. "Words have meaning" after all!

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Re: What are you talking about?

So three cases extrapolates to one a day? All three involving mentally ill people brandishing weapons? (well, one of them not really). Does a lady being pregnant make her incapable of doing harm to a person?

... again, edited because I'm really trying to limit the amount of time I waste in meaningless arguments on this board and KHC anymore. You guys have your fun.

 

[BoilerMadness]

You have to keep in mind,

Originally posted by BoilerJS:
I find it hard to comprehend that a person hired to protect and serve values human life so little.
I would not have believed it. Absolutely shocking.

cops are people, too. There are good ones, bad ones, and the whole gamut in between. Unfortunately, the bad ones get a lot more press, than the good ones, which makes it appear that the bad outnumber the good..

 

[BoilerMadness]

Originally posted by Beeazlebub:
I've been around long enough to know that "facts" in a court room don't always add up to justice.

There is still a requirement to have a jury capable of understanding the facts. If you remember the O.J. Simpson trial, they had people on that jury, that couldn't spell DNA, let alone understand it.

Keep in mind, most of the people on juries are the ones, who weren't clever enough to get out of jury duty.

Lastly, it also depends on what your definition of "justice" is. A lot of people have a version of justice in mind, that mirrors their biases, but may NOT be actual justice.

 

[atmafola]

Re: What are you talking about?

conservative estimates of police shooting and killing civilians surely suggest there is more than one such incident per day. unfortunately, since police dept are not required to report such incidents. It is difficult to get proper stats. Of course, not everyone of those deaths would have happened under questionable circumstances. But those saying it happens once a day are more likely to be right than you are.

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:
So three cases extrapolates to one a day? All three involving mentally ill people brandishing weapons? (well, one of them not really). Does a lady being pregnant make her incapable of doing harm to a person?

... again, edited because I'm really trying to limit the amount of time I waste in meaningless arguments on this board and KHC anymore. You guys have your fun.

 

[qazplm]

speaking of bs

"Qazpalm" talked about that case in multiple posts.

And no that was not the "worst" of the shootings.

 

[qazplm]

Re: What are you talking about?

34 in the month of March

 

[BoilerMadness]

I suspect

Originally posted by qazplm:
on the shooting, pre video, and then post video.

This would have been quietly swept under the rug. I'm not suggesting it's defensible, I'm just suggesting there's a pattern where the police (and DA) seem almost unable to police their own in these situations barring strong media attention.

that the initial reports were based on the officer's report of events.

Had the video NOT appeared, there would have been a huge discrepancy between the officer's assertion, that he felt threatened and the follow up investigation of the shooting scene.

When you factor in where the victim fell and where the shell casings fell, it would be apparent to anyone who's ever shot a gun, that the cop could NOT have been threatened at the time of the shooting. Also 8 shots fired and 5 in the back of the victim. Also the planting of the tazer, which probably did NOT have the victim's fingerprints on it, which would disqualify the tazer as a potential weapon.

Unless this cop had naked pictures of the Chief and a sheep, I believe he would have been charged. Probably not capital murder, but at least manslaughter. Just my opinion.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Originally posted by atmafola:
conservative estimates of police shooting and killing civilians surely suggest there is more than one such incident per day. unfortunately, since police dept are not required to report such incidents. It is difficult to get proper stats. Of course, not everyone of those deaths would have happened under questionable circumstances. But those saying it happens once a day are more likely to be right than you are.

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:
So three cases extrapolates to one a day? All three involving mentally ill people brandishing weapons? (well, one of them not really). Does a lady being pregnant make her incapable of doing harm to a person?

... again, edited because I'm really trying to limit the amount of time I waste in meaningless arguments on this board and KHC anymore. You guys have your fun.

A police shooting killing a civilian is not necessarily "similar" to this North Charleston murder by default. That is my point.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[atmafola]

Re: I suspect

Originally posted by BigE23:

Originally posted by qazplm:
on the shooting, pre video, and then post video.

This would have been quietly swept under the rug. I'm not suggesting it's defensible, I'm just suggesting there's a pattern where the police (and DA) seem almost unable to police their own in these situations barring strong media attention.

that the initial reports were based on the officer's report of events.

Had the video NOT appeared, there would have been a huge discrepancy between the officer's assertion, that he felt threatened and the follow up investigation of the shooting scene.

When you factor in where the victim fell and where the shell casings fell, it would be apparent to anyone who's ever shot a gun, that the cop could NOT have been threatened at the time of the shooting. Also 8 shots fired and 5 in the back of the victim. Also the planting of the tazer, which probably did NOT have the victim's fingerprints on it, which would disqualify the tazer as a potential weapon.

Unless this cop had naked pictures of the Chief and a sheep, I believe he would have been charged. Probably not capital murder, but at least manslaughter. Just my opinion.

You guys have lots of faith in the system. I am willing to bet my last dollar, this officer will have escaped charges. Didn't someone post statistics showing all recent previous shootings in SC resulted in no charges for the officer. But we will never know. I am still not optimistic this guy won't walk when all is said and done. I am just glad he gets his day in court.

 

[BoilerMadness]

Re: I suspect

Originally posted by atmafola:

Originally posted by BigE23:

Originally posted by qazplm:
on the shooting, pre video, and then post video.

This would have been quietly swept under the rug. I'm not suggesting it's defensible, I'm just suggesting there's a pattern where the police (and DA) seem almost unable to police their own in these situations barring strong media attention.

that the initial reports were based on the officer's report of events.

Had the video NOT appeared, there would have been a huge discrepancy between the officer's assertion, that he felt threatened and the follow up investigation of the shooting scene.

When you factor in where the victim fell and where the shell casings fell, it would be apparent to anyone who's ever shot a gun, that the cop could NOT have been threatened at the time of the shooting. Also 8 shots fired and 5 in the back of the victim. Also the planting of the tazer, which probably did NOT have the victim's fingerprints on it, which would disqualify the tazer as a potential weapon.

Unless this cop had naked pictures of the Chief and a sheep, I believe he would have been charged. Probably not capital murder, but at least manslaughter. Just my opinion.

You guys have lots of faith in the system. I am willing to bet my last dollar, this officer will have escaped charges. Didn't someone post statistics showing all recent previous shootings in SC resulted in no charges for the officer. But we will never know. I am still not optimistic this guy won't walk when all is said and done. I am just glad he gets his day in court.

There is NO WAY he can walk away from this. There are too many eyes watching for that to happen.

 

[Purdue97]

Your right it was worse

I think the cops contributed to the situation in Cleveland by pulling up on the scene real fast. That said, they were responding to a call that said an individual was waving a gun around at people.

That video clearly shows the kid approaching the cop car with his hands not in the air, but his hand on the handle to the "weapon".

Just saw a more clear video of that shooting in Utah, and it is worse than I thought. The guy was walking away, had headphones on, did not pose a threat to anyone, nor had he been arrested. He actually turned around to see the cop, the cop is yelling get your hands out, he listens to the cop to get his hands out, and then is shot. So he was in effect listenign to the cop when he got shot(much like the SC case at the gas station) but was not shot in the back. My bad.

Oh, do not get me wrong, I think police definitely abuse authority. I just did not buy the original point on ethnic background/race.

 

[Purdue97]

Re: speaking of bs

We can have differences of opinion on the shootings. I think the Utah one and the SC shooting at the gas station were the worst. Just negligence all the way around.

I asked and brought up the Utah shooting many times when the Ferguson deal was a mess, and your main point was lets forget about race, and never really addressed it. if I missed it, my bad, but I do not think I did.

 

[Purdue97]

-Not sure what is to be made of it:

-This should be the quickest trial with a guilty verdict or murder on record

-Police lie or fabricate their stories on occasion. They will do so when it benefits them. And for better or worse, people in court will listen to a cop over a person with a previous record.

-I still ask what the hell happened to using tasers first especially when other person is not armed?

-I still think the use of videos can have negative side effects. I listened to a police commisioner out in COL the other day talk about them, and he had some interesting view points. He said if made to have them cops will always have them due to fear of ACLU and other charges. He then said when a cop goes to a domestic violence call, it is all recorded. Then it is part of the record. I have no idea if this next part is true(what is your opinion) he then said when a police report is requested he thinks the video will be part of that and it could end up on youtube, etc. A lot of people's lives that were once private except for printed reports would now be all over the internet on video.

Not sure a lot of people would really want that.

This post was edited on 4/10 1:57 AM by Purdue97

 

[Boiler20]

Re: because almost no one is that good of a shot

I may be wrong on this, but iirc, there is a degree requirement to be an Indiana State Trooper.

IMPD is paid so low I'm told that they wouldn't stand much of a chance at getting degreed professionals, but somehow enough feel called to it that many are degreed.

Also, I'm probably way off base here, but aiming for the legs, when so many perps are high on meth, etc.,...may not have any effect due to lack of a pain threshold when on meth or bath salts, etc.,.... I speak to some IMPD officers at the Speedway near our house as they use it as a sort of base before their shift and they say the meth and bath salts are out of hand enough that many officers are questioning their career choice. Of course you won't read that in the Indy Star or see it on the news or hear it from Mayor Ballard or Gov. Pence.

 

[atmafola]

Re: Your right it was worse

Originally posted by Purdue97:
I think the cops contributed to the situation in Cleveland by pulling up on the scene real fast. That said, they were responding to a call that said an individual was waving a gun around at people.

That video clearly shows the kid approaching the cop car with his hands not in the air, but his hand on the handle to the "weapon".

Just saw a more clear video of that shooting in Utah, and it is worse than I thought. The guy was walking away, had headphones on, did not pose a threat to anyone, nor had he been arrested. He actually turned around to see the cop, the cop is yelling get your hands out, he listens to the cop to get his hands out, and then is shot. So he was in effect listenign to the cop when he got shot(much like the SC case at the gas station) but was not shot in the back. My bad.

Oh, do not get me wrong, I think police definitely abuse authority. I just did not buy the original point on ethnic background/race.

I agree chief, we can agree and disagree on which is the worst. A 12 yr old kid given no time to respond or comprehend whats going on will always look worse to me than a 20 year old man given a couple more seconds. Both were sad and unnecessary. Go back and watch the Utah case, imagine the person really had a gun, then interprete the sequence of actions in that light. He is walking away, back turned to police officer, hands to the side initially. Then he reaches under his shirt, hands now away from sight. Turns around both hands now under his shirt. Attempts to take hands out and he is shot by some jumpy officer. The whole time he is being told to show his hands. The worst thing is I don't understand how he can safely follow the officers command. Seems he was doomed from the moment he reached to pull his pants up and his hands went out of sight. The cleveland 12 year faced the same dilemna once the idiotic cop decided to pull up so close. Even if he had been given enough time, there's almost no safe way for him to follow the officers commands.

My hope is that these debates shift the questions from "was it justified" towards "was it necessary"? Also, can we find better ways to keep police safe while making sure the other parties, regardless of criminal history, make it to their day in court? I think police culture and training really need to be re-examined. As for the racial aspects, the best I can hope for is clear consistent policing guidelines that can be uniformly applied regardless of persons and leave almost no room for police discretion.

 

[qazplm]

first

my main point of forget about race was a main topic before anyone brought up the Utah shooting. I said that to remove race from the discussion and analyze the issues without even introducing it. It was NOT in response to the Utah shooting.

Second, I responded to the Utah shooting on its own merits. I never once "responded" to it with "oh never mind that, let's talk about race."

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Originally posted by Purdue97:

-I still think the use of videos can have negative side effects. I listened to a police commisioner out in COL the other day talk about them, and he had some interesting view points. He said if made to have them cops will always have them due to fear of ACLU and other charges. He then said when a cop goes to a domestic violence call, it is all recorded. Then it is part of the record. I have no idea if this next part is true(what is your opinion) he then said when a police report is requested he thinks the video will be part of that and it could end up on youtube, etc. A lot of people's lives that were once private except for printed reports would now be all over the internet on video.

I think this is a pretty weak argument against. IMO, the benefit of having not only the police officer's behavior, but that of the civilians involved on video could serve for fewer violent interactions between police and civilians. Both sides know "they're being watched".

Does anyone know how these cameras work? Do they save the video locally or is it "streamed" or recorded some place else? What's to prevent a police officer from shooting someone, destroying their camera, and claiming it was destroyed in a struggle? Obviously, it's more difficult to prove a physical altercation like that, but it could happen.

 

[qazplm]

can't imagine they are streamed

all sorts of problems there, so I'd have to guess they are saved locally.

 

[Purdue97]

For the record he was neutral or pro camera. So am I. That said, there are going to be some consequences that arise from the use of cameras that people do not like or forsee. That was his main point

 

[Purdue97]

Actually I stand corrected

When these incidents have come out in the past I have always had a wait and see approach. I jumped the gun this time and just said yes, this cop is guilty. Scold myself for that.

It now appears that there is testimony and guess what, a longer video with more definition(I mean nobody else has ever edited tapes before right CNN?), that allegedly shows a struggle, a fight for the taser, and one of the prongs from the taser was actually in the police officer.

If that allegedly went down, well, get in struggle with a cop, have the taser go off and part of it hit him, yeah, you are going to get shot and there is no murder charge.

So, I will wait to see what is shown, testified, and allowed in court before I have an opinion.

 

[kescwi]

The dash cam video, really? Supposedly protocol in North Chuck said the officer was to stay with the car, not give chase and the initial investigators are saying they had concerns with the officers version of events vs what they encounter but you think the dash cam video of Scott running may exonerate the officer?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[tantalum]

I almost wish the video had been held back until it was decided if the officer would be charged or not. I think the officer would have been charged once it was determined the man was shot in the back 8 times. I am not around these situations all the time so I cannot say with much confidence what would have happened without the video.
If you want to get all worked up about police brutality look up the Kelly Thomas case from 2011. He was a 30 something mentally ill man that was loitering in an area, maybe he was looking for unlocked cars so he could pilfer something. He gave the office a little lip but basically tied to comply with them. He was beaten and tazered to death by 3 or 4 officers while others were standing around . Most of the beating can be seen from online video. It is hard to watch. It ends with Kelly THomas crying for his dad to save him as he was being suffocated.That story did not gain national attention probably because Kelly Thomas was white and thus did not fit the msm and Justice department narrative of white police officers killing innocent blacks..
In that case several officers were charged but were found not guilty by a jury. Why those officers walked is a mystery to me.

 

[Purdue97]

Not sure what video it is

Not sure if a cop breaking protocol by leaving the car is a prosecutable offense. Ask qazplm-he might know.

Not sure cause I am not on social media but apparently there is a video out there that shows a struggle involving the taser and the cop ending up getting shot with one of the prongs. All I am saying if the video shows that that changes things. Any halfway sensible person would admit that.

That turns it into a likely self defense or manslaughter charge. I would think the cop still could get excessive force because of all the shots fired after he ran but like I said, if the above is true this situation is totally different. One has to keep in mind that cop in Utah did not get in any trouble and there was no altercation.

But like I said I will wait until it is all released and in court before making a decision.