they actually want to/maybe by now did charge him for their collateral damage saying it was his fault...
Posted on 12/14/2013 9:31:51 AM PST by John Semmens
Two New York City police officers wounded two pedestrians when they opened fire on an unarmed man who was wandering into traffic.
Assistant District Attorney Shannon Lucey defended the discharge of the weapons saying that “the person the officers were trying to apprehend may have been mentally deranged. He could’ve been hit by a car or bus and been seriously injured or killed. They officers felt justified using deadly force to try to stop him.”
The deranged man was eventually arrested and will be charged with assaulting the two women that the police shot while pursuing him. As Lucey explained, “this man created the situation that caused the police to shoot these women. For that he is criminally liable.”
Lucey dismissed the possibility that firing on a jaywalking suspect might have been an excessive use of force. “If we go down that road it would expose the city to potential tort damages due the victims,” she pointed out. “By lodging charges against the man we arrested we divert any lawsuit by the shooting victims toward him.”
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...
http://azconservative.org/2013/12/14/secretary-says-insurers-should-waive-premiums/
they actually want to/maybe by now did charge him for their collateral damage saying it was his fault...
Close, very close to the mark
Is there traffic cam video of the incident?
Out of curiosity, how many words did you actually change?
The insane libtard reasoning is or has worked its way into the NYPD.
S0, let me get this correct....the Police wanted to use deadly force because they were concerned he might get killed by wandering into traffic?
Yes, yes I see the logic now.
BTW maybe a couple of more hours at the range may be in order for the officers.
Is this art imitating life or life imitating art?
I'm so confused.
Sounds more like Denver or LA than New York.
i don't know, but i did read an article stating the cops want to charge him for "inciting" the incident
Sadly your analysis is very likely accurate, although not proved, and denied by the cops.
It's the standard "we thought we saw a gun".
Nice John.. you got me....next time I will read the tag line.
My bad....ouch do I feel embarrassed.
Quite a record of bystander shootings by NYPD. That new gun law really helps.
New York Monte Python Poice Dept.
No worry, NYC has plenty of bystanders!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.